Printable View
Squenix is doing a DQ press conference this Monday where they will be making a huge announcement of the series. Most speculation is that they are finally going to reveal DQX since its a Wii exclusive and the consoles days are numbered.
Course I imagine some other announcements as well, like a new Joker Monster title and of course some heavy PR for the DQ Anniversary pack that's slated to come out soon. I imagine a few spinoffs as well.
I'd rather they announce DQX for the Wii U or whatever it's called. Not that I'll end up getting one, but they really need to stop releasing games at the very end of a console's life, it's not good for sales.
It's happening right now, via live ustream!
http://www.ustream.tv/channel/se-event
DQX is an MMORPG you can play offline, Produced by Yosuke Saito (NIER) and directed by Jin Fujisawa (DQ8, DQ9) and first internally developed DQ game at Square Enix.
It's off air.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bastian
Edit: The heck?
Yeah, that happened to me too. Weird.Quote:
Originally Posted by Depression MoonIt's off air.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bastian
Edit: The heck?
Anyway, fun facts I learned about Dragon Quest X from the presentation:
-It's for the Wii still, however they will release a Wii U version with better graphics at a later date, and your saved information from the Wii version is transferable to the Wii U version
-It will heavily feature "online gameplay" (they did NOT refer to this as MMORG, but from the video, it sort of looks like straight up MMORG)
-You CAN play it beginning to end without being online, using NPC party members
-The visual style is closest to VIII
-Battles are like DQ IX (non-random)
-Features a "huge story"
-You can cut out clothes and create weapons and such and in online give those to other people which can increase your "fame"
-Character creation is even more detailed than in DQIX
-Your house is completely customize-able inside and outside.
-takes place on five continents with five very different races
-there will even bee streetpass features for those with a 3Ds as well
Trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkWo2DApLiY
In-game footage:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sK46t9UudZ8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5bwTp5mnHh8
Looks pretty cool. What I expected IX to look like after I played VIII. Not really digging the MMO aspect of it. I wish games would either just be full MMO or full single player instead of these hybrids. At least the single player mode looks to be worth it.
You can play it single player and totally not involve yourself in the mmo aspect.
I was worried when I heard the rumor that X was going to be MMO, but I really like this idea for MMO. I might actually try MMO out for once! (Well, an ex forced me to try WoW for like two hours and I got bored).
Screens and artwork
(SPOILER)http://game.watch.impress.co.jp/img/...475/429/24.jpg
http://game.watch.impress.co.jp/img/...475/429/23.jpg
http://game.watch.impress.co.jp/img/...475/429/22.jpg
http://game.watch.impress.co.jp/img/...475/429/21.jpg
http://game.watch.impress.co.jp/img/...475/429/20.jpg
http://game.watch.impress.co.jp/img/...475/429/19.jpg
http://game.watch.impress.co.jp/img/...475/429/18.jpg
http://game.watch.impress.co.jp/img/...475/429/17.jpg
http://game.watch.impress.co.jp/img/...475/429/16.jpg
http://game.watch.impress.co.jp/img/...475/429/15.jpg
http://game.watch.impress.co.jp/img/...475/429/14.jpg
http://game.watch.impress.co.jp/img/...475/429/13.jpg
http://game.watch.impress.co.jp/img/...475/429/12.jpg
http://game.watch.impress.co.jp/img/...475/429/11.jpg
http://game.watch.impress.co.jp/img/...475/429/10.jpg
http://game.watch.impress.co.jp/img/...475/429/08.jpg
http://game.watch.impress.co.jp/img/...475/429/07.jpg
http://game.watch.impress.co.jp/img/...475/429/06.jpg
http://game.watch.impress.co.jp/img/...475/429/05.jpg
EDIT: Spoilers added to avoid giant wall of images. ~Murder
The MMO portion has me worried because I wonder if it's going to have an impact on the single player.
There is an online connection required to play all of Dragon Quest X therefore it is an MMO game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Depression Moon
I thought one of the earlier posts clarified that you don't need an internet connection, you can play with NPC party members?Quote:
Originally Posted by ShinGundamThere is an online connection required to play all of Dragon Quest X therefore it is an MMO game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Depression Moon
I'll admit being a little worried, but I have faith in them. I heard DQIX lost some of the feel of the series with the direction it went but I'll reserve judgment till I play it. Personally, after DQVIII I wish they'd keep going with really deep, huge worlds with sidequests for the single player to uncover. Multiplayer diminishes that feeling and there's a lot of room for road bmps (especially with it being developed internally at Square.)
It's pretty weird this isn't being handed off to Level-5 - they have experience with HD consoles and with creating multiplayer online games a lot like this. I'm just gonna hope WKC2 is good whenever I pick it up.
Overall I'll have Faith in Horii & Co. He knows how to make an accessible, yet deep and overall well designed games. And if it fails, well, there's tons of games for me to play for the first time and revisit.
We don't know that for sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShinGundamThere is an online connection required to play all of Dragon Quest X therefore it is an MMO game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Depression Moon
At the event they said that you DON'T have to play with others and that you can clear the game 100% on your own using NPCs.
What you're probably referring to is the game's support page which seems to indicate that you can play the game offline for the first few hours, but "to play all elements of the game, an internet connection is required."
I think this is just referencing the fact that if you want to play the MMO elements, you'll (obviously) need to be connected to the internet.
And also new quests and such. Those familiar with DQ9 will know that each week we were offered new quests to download and new items in a special shop and such. DQX is expected to have a similar set up.
so, no. to complete the main story 100% you will not have to venture into MMO land. At least that's what I'm getting from the seemingly contradictory statements.
Unfortunately, I fear this game is going to go the route of IX in that none of the PCs have any personality. I really liked the personalities of the characters in VIII as their interaction moved the story along. It doesn't look like we're going to get that in this game. Which sucks, because I feel in the DQ games we get these great introduced to these great worlds but they feel so static since we don't get to see how our characters react to it.
So basically, DQX is SE's attempt at making their own version of White Knight Chronicles. The game doesn't look bad, but not as interesting as previous DQ games had been. I'll wait and see. I'll probably have to pick it up simply cause NoA doesn't seem interested in releasing some of their other high profile JRPG Wii titles here. :mad2:
...which is their intent, I think. This is completely off-topic, but I'm pretty sure the reason WHY NoA won't release the OpRainfall three RPGs is because they are trying to starve NA gamers for RPGs so that DQX will sell as much as possible, thereby strengthening their relationship with squeenix.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno
Conspiracy theory?
Dude, that would be insane.
Also, monthly fees confirmed to be monthly fees and you do in fact need an internet connection to play past the "first few hours."
Dragon Quest X has usage fees, requires Internet connection; does not require an NES | Joystiq
I feel the fact DQIX and DQX are Nintendo exclusives is more than enough proof to say that Nintendo and Squenix are in a pretty good relationship with each other. Holding back other titles just to boost some sales is pretty much going to sour their relationship with Mistwalker and may cause some Monolith Soft employees to quit Nintendo. I'm pretty sure the reasoning is simply that NoA sees the Wii as a family party game machine and don't see why they should release some titles that appeal to what they see as a minority in the Wii market. Course, I feel that NoA is simply underestimating the possibility that some of the Operation Rainfall titles hold the potential to be system sellers, but its also likely that European journalist are simply giving the games higher praise as a "take that" to US fans who have for years gotten better releases.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bastian...which is their intent, I think. This is completely off-topic, but I'm pretty sure the reason WHY NoA won't release the OpRainfall three RPGs is because they are trying to starve NA gamers for RPGs so that DQX will sell as much as possible, thereby strengthening their relationship with squeenix.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno
I also wouldn't be surprised if NoA is simply holding onto the titles so they can release them as launch titles for the Wii U, if their goal for the console is to appeal to hardcore players, having two heavy JRPGs as launch titles would be pretty good for launch sales, course they would have to do some modding to justify them as Wii U titles. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if DQX got canceled for the Wii outside of Japan and they simply stuck to the Wii U version for US/PAL.
If they're worried about sales numbers, they can't justify cancelling a Wii version of a game for a Wii U exclusive. There is already a HUGE install base in the Wii, and the Wii U is backwards compatible. Those who want the "better" version (see Twilight Princess) will buy the Wii U version, and those that don't want to buy the new system right away can buy the Wii version, and continue playing it on the Wii U when they do buy one. The two games will still be connected. Same holds true for the OpRF games. Why alienate the current install base of people who already own the system and are starving for the games? Just releasing them on the next system would upset at least half of those that want the games.
THE JACKEL
MWahahahahaha I actually like Bastian's theory, and why not? NoA have no clue what you're trying to say when you talk about real gaming. All they know is some people might want these games and journalists might give them a thumbs up, but why would they care about that when the media has been crapping all over them this generation, for a brief respite in response to the 3DS hype, only for it all to start falling again once the truth came out.
And why would Monolith employees quit Nintendo b/c of this? I'm sure they could care less about the Gaijin considering their games are coming out and doing well in JP not to mention getting tons of acclaim in EU. Hell, they might have no idea and could care less if the game comes out over here.
I think DQX is a real possibility here but I wouldn't hold your breath for those three, as well as the DQ collection while you're at it. Which is sad, because as Jackel pointed out, that would actually make it a system selller for me :)
The media has only been crapping on them lately (like the last year or so) they've pretty much dominated this generation and have caused probably the biggest shift in video game directions in over a decade, with even Sony and Microsoft jumping in on the motion control gaming. Hell Microsoft seems pretty damn committed if this last E3 was any indication. The 3DS has certainly faltered but when you break the number one rule of console selling (affordability) then you should expect some less than steller outcomes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bolivar
Considering this company was founded after they broke away from Square, over the argument of mishandling their projects, and then it was repeated with Namco Bandai with Xenosaga Episode 2's mishandling, I would say its not unlikely possibility. These guys are truly the "how dare you tamper with my masterpiece! I'm leaving" art types. Of course, I meant this in case of Bastion's scenario where NoA purposely did not release these games in order to garner some extra points with a third party company. Who wants to work for a company that purposely diminishes your work so they can score extra points with an outsourced company. Shouldn't in-house developers get a bit more priority?Quote:
And why would Monolith employees quit Nintendo b/c of this? I'm sure they could care less about the Gaijin considering their games are coming out and doing well in JP not to mention getting tons of acclaim in EU. Hell, they might have no idea and could care less if the game comes out over here.
Ignoring the conspiracy theory aspect, I agree they probably don't care, they are already busy recruiting for their next project which is suspected to be a new Baiten title. Mistwalker is actually supporting Operation Rainfall . The real issue with NoA decision, is that the PAL version already calls for an English translation. So its not like they have to worry about financing a translation cause its already done, and all they need to do is release it for the North America region, which would not take much effort. NoE has already done all the costly parts, NoA just needs to get off their ass and realize a Zelda game is not the way to send off a console.
The DQ Collection never had a chance outside of Japan. I don't see too many people jumping at the chance to drop serious dough on a collection of three NES titles. DQX is definetly seeing release outside of Japan, considering how much effort has been put into releasing the lost titles out here, and Nintendo itself handled the release of DQIX, its a heavy weight. Still, its not like Nintendo has the greatest online of the consoles, and its not like SE has a good track record with MMOs lately. I'd be a bit concerned and skeptical at this point.Quote:
I think DQX is a real possibility here but I wouldn't hold your breath for those three, as well as the DQ collection while you're at it. Which is sad, because as Jackel pointed out, that would actually make it a system selller for me :)
Do you follow a lot of mainstream journalism outlets (granted, they all suck) or listen to a lot of podcasts? The Wii had a lot of love (because they showed a lot of love) up until the end of 2008 around when No More Heroes came out. After that they've constantly been crapped on, parodied, humiliated, and branded by gaming journalists as the coming of the anti-christ. The 2010 E3 press conference was clearly a response to the outcry from the media FOR YEARS that Nintendo no longer provides "hardcore" (still hate the word) experiences. They name dropped nearly every major franchise of the last twenty years in order to get the support they did. Now that Nintendo is selling expensive hardware and need to sell more than 1-2 games to 8-year old girls (who can't play their new handheld) and soccer moms (who think it's just the third iteration of the DS) this was a move they HAD to do to counter the negative publicity. As it turns out, their name dropping was just that: name dropping. So many of those games have been cancelled, moved to other platforms, or delayed (some likely indefinitely).Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno
And I wouldn't say they completely shifted this industry - they've simply created a market outside of gaming that closely resembles this one. But it's not the same as "this thing of ours." Microsoft and Sony adopted motion control to appease investors - there's no better evidence for that than the utter drought of original, motion-only content immediately after the products launched. It became a success for Microsoft and they've clearly gone in that direction. But as the years went on and the mature games were panned, even Nintendo had to learn the hard truth: you simply can't make compelling experiences with motion inputs. Some PS3 games integrate it really well, but those titles are still best with a controller. And the possibility that ANY hardcore title will come to the Kinect has all but been foreclosed. Nintendo is still innovating interfaces, but they've brought back the focus on buttons and have even knelt before the altar of graphics. As Wii sales have died down and the truth of it only being a fad has been laid bare, it's Nintendo who's now adjusting according to Sony and Microsoft's ways.
IIRC those were over creative differences, not distribution hiccups. I really think if they're able to create the games they want they're content, getting additional advertising and acclaim is just a bonus.Quote:
Considering this company was founded after they broke away from Square, over the argument of mishandling their projects, and then it was repeated with Namco Bandai with Xenosaga Episode 2's mishandling, I would say its not unlikely possibility.
It would certainly get me to buy a Wii. DQX, unfortunately, not so much. I'm sad!Quote:
The DQ Collection never had a chance outside of Japan. I don't see too many people jumping at the chance to drop serious dough on a collection of three NES titles.
hahah, my friend Casey would cry with joy if that were true. Too bad it's a silly The Onion-esque source.Quote:
Originally Posted by Depression Moon
With the evolution of MMOs in recent years, it's kind of silly that SE is taking their most archaic franchise and making an MMO out of it. If there is a monthly fee required to play this game then I will not be playing it. Hopefully that aspect of the game is 100% optional and the single player mode is worth it.
Its kind of poor taste to undercut the strength of your own evidence. :p I don't listen to podcasts and gaming journalism cause its mostly bias or paid off. Besides, both were decrying the Wii even back when it was outselling both Sony and Microsoft hand over fist, so its not like any of their commentary is new, its just now followed with a "sales for the Wii is declining, so we were right all along".Quote:
Originally Posted by Bolivar
Honestly, looking at what NoJ has been doing and what NoA has been doing, I would argue that the Wii's issue with the gaming enthusiast outside of Japan come mostly from the fact that NoA does purposely appeased a demograph of non-gamers but when you start to look at what has been released in Japan, the system actually had a much better game library (course this isn't anything new with any Japanese console) and actually had some major titles and sequels that never made it over, that could have made the console more appealing.
I would argue the fact they created a new market that even Sony and Microsoft had to bow to years later and is still relevant today is a major shift. The problem with Sony and Microsoft is that they forgot that games need to be accessible and not require years of honing your skills in the genre. Who wants to pick up a FPS for the firs time only to get hammered in Online play mode (which is 90% of the game) just because you didn't have the 10 year start most of the other players have had. There is a reason why some genres become hardcore cause they reach a point of skill level where you have to seriously dedicate time and resources just to be adequate. Its a good business model but its also one that has to deal with either angering fans by appealing to more casual fans, or completely shut out new players and hope for a SFII/Madden approach of having a dedicated fanbase who will buy tweaked up versions released on a yearly basis or new DLC maps and content every few months.Quote:
And I wouldn't say they completely shifted this industry - they've simply created a market outside of gaming that closely resembles this one. But it's not the same as "this thing of ours." Microsoft and Sony adopted motion control to appease investors - there's no better evidence for that than the utter drought of original, motion-only content immediately after the products launched. It became a success for Microsoft and they've clearly gone in that direction. But as the years went on and the mature games were panned, even Nintendo had to learn the hard truth: you simply can't make compelling experiences with motion inputs. Some PS3 games integrate it really well, but those titles are still best with a controller. And the possibility that ANY hardcore title will come to the Kinect has all but been foreclosed. Nintendo is still innovating interfaces, but they've brought back the focus on buttons and have even knelt before the altar of graphics. As Wii sales have died down and the truth of it only being a fad has been laid bare, it's Nintendo who's now adjusting according to Sony and Microsoft's ways.
The Wii made gaming accessible to a much larger audience than before, and it made gaming more socially accessible and not just people imagining overweight nerds playing murder/rape simulators. Sony and Microsoft should be grateful cause these kids will most likely grow older and start picking up their consoles and bringing in fresh blood. Then they can nickle and dime for extra content. :shifty: You should seriously look at the bigger picture here than just the usual console war BS that hasn't been relevant since middle school for anyone. :p
I would also argue that Nintendo's goal has been to change how people play, which started with the DS and went to the Wii, and now the Wii U and 3DS. I've always felt motion gaming was innovative and something for the future, but I don't believe it was meant to be an exclusive interface and more of a new type of gaming that consoles will employ in the future. If Nintendo wanted to make motion gaming the major interface over standard controllers, then they wouldn't have bothered with buttons but they still allowed for the Wii Mote to be utilized like a regular controller. I think the idea of pure motion gaming is simply just hyberbole created by those game journalist you love so much to get more clicks on their webpage.
Namco was creative, Square was having to deal with a budget and release schedule, but I digress, cause I only said this scenario was plausible if Bastion's theory was correct. As oppose to what Nintendo has pretty much said, which is that they don't believe the games would fare well in the Western market. It's one thing when marketing tells you you're game might not do well in the market, its another thing entirely to tell them we shouldn't release your game cause its good enough to compete and take away sales from a third party company, who is technically a competitor. It would be like Sony telling the GoW team they can't release GoW4 in the US cause they want Capcom's DMC reboot to get better sales.Quote:
IIRC those were over creative differences, not distribution hiccups. I really think if they're able to create the games they want they're content, getting additional advertising and acclaim is just a bonus.Quote:
Considering this company was founded after they broke away from Square, over the argument of mishandling their projects, and then it was repeated with Namco Bandai with Xenosaga Episode 2's mishandling, I would say its not unlikely possibility.
[/QUOTE]Quote:
It would certainly get me to buy a Wii. DQX, unfortunately, not so much. I'm sad!Quote:
The DQ Collection never had a chance outside of Japan. I don't see too many people jumping at the chance to drop serious dough on a collection of three NES titles.
If you're going to drop that kind of dough, it would be cheaper to just buy a GBC and both of the GBC editions. It would cost about the same, and actually be portable. Hell, if Squenix wasn't trying to make some quick cash with this, they could have actually released all three games on Virtual Console for a third of the cost by now.
The monthly fee will only be for the online aspects (mmo, maybe for the dlc of new quests and such as well, if they wanted to be jerks about it) but they clearly stated at the presentation that you can play 100% of the main story without being online. I REALLY don't think they'll force you to buy a $60 game and then pay a monthly fee just to play and finish it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Del Murder
Not to mention that I really, really doubt we will have to pay outside of Japan for the monthly fee. Monster Hunter Tri is the closest analogy of a Wii game wherein Japanese players had to pay a monthly fee for the online stuff but NA and EU players did not... because NoA and NoE know that such things would never fly here. At least not yet.
I already posted a link where Square clarified that you need to be online to play past "the first few hours" of the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bastian
Also, while Monster Hunter was able to get away with giving the NA version for free, I think DQ will still charge us. Nintendo clearly has it in their head that this series can be more popular than it actually is in NA, and considering this is more in line with an MMO than Monster Hunter, and only the smaller guys go free to play (WoW and EQ are still monthly fees) we could be seeing this fee.
I think we have a misunderstanding. My argument was that Nintendo wouldn't try to appease mainstream journalists by bringing those games over here because mainstream journalists have been bashing them for years. You disagreed and said that it's only been recently. I ask you if you follow mainstream journalists. The evidence's strength isn't based on how much integrity these idiots have. The evidence's strength is based on the fact that they've been bashing Nintendo for years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Woof!
They did not create a new market. Adults were killing productivity at their jobs at sites like Addicting Games and Candy Stand long before Smart Phones and Nintendo monetized the casual experience. The other half of their market is younger children. I would argue the DS and Wii have simply been the apotheosis of the Nintendo experience, because Nintendo products always brought in young children (how old were we when we were glued to our GameBoys and GBCs?), it's just now they've made such quality titles and enough varied titles to spark any child's interest, that they've really smashed the sales charts. The one area where they have broke new ground is young girls and that is an accomplishment. I never understood the power of the DS until I realized I had just played NSMB with my two little girl cousins who both had DS' and were both under the age of 10. I badly want to discredit Nintendo's accomplishment in this area, but I can't. The one thing I can think of is Tamagachi but even that is questionable.Quote:
I would argue the fact they created a new market that even Sony and Microsoft had to bow to years later and is still relevant today is a major shift.
Still, I disagree that gamers have gotten older or younger. The older crowd now just has an outlet for it on one of the big 3 console manufacturers. And me and almost all of my friends have been playing video games as long as we've been old enough to hold and use a controller. But the young girls crowd? Yeah, Nintendo created that one. But I think they're losing it to Apple.
I think Nintendo kept the buttons and D-pads because there would lose so many developers. But really dude? You don't think Nintendo hailed touch and later motion inputs as the future of gaming? Do you really want me to dig up the quotables from Iwata, Miyamoto, and Reggie where they defensively explain why they've forgone better graphics and online connectivity (which they now have ironically embraced, relative to this thread)?Quote:
I think the idea of pure motion gaming is simply just hyberbole created by those game journalist you love so much to get more clicks on their webpage.
And don't accuse me of loving those journalists, b. I've said in this thread and others that they're corny, historically inaccurate, biased, and flame baiting. Never confuse these dudes for my role models (those are Tetsuya Nomura and Yoshinori Kitase!!! :) )
I assumed Square was creative. Because I just got to Disc 2 of Xenogears and I have to say: wow, dude. Wow. This is probably the most unfinished game I've ever played, although I like to say that Sakaguchi put Fei in his "Time-Out Chair" to tell his little story becasue the gameplay just wasn't up to Square quality :) . But I guess I could see how this is more of a budget/timing problem than creative interference. It's sad because I read Square was going to greenlight a sequel if the game sold 1 million copies and it just hit 900,000 before they all decided to leave... sad.Quote:
Namco was creative, Square was having to deal with a budget and release schedule, but I digress, cause I only said this scenario was plausible if Bastion's theory was correct.
Also, your example would have been if Sony told the GoW team that they couldn't release GoW4 in Japan because of DMC sales... I would tend to think they still wouldn't care, but I can see what you're getting at and for people as passionate as Monolith I wouldn't be surprised if you were right.
I'm gonna still hold out. This is the golden age of remakes, my friend, and I know sooner or later an awesome edition is going to come out with these games on it and commemorative artwork/memorabilia and it could even be for something I own. The portability is also an issue for me. Don't get me wrong, I loved playing Dragon Quest IV and V on the DS but as I learned with Shining Force II on the HD Sonic collection, these games were meant to be played on a TV. So we'll see.Quote:
If you're going to drop that kind of dough, it would be cheaper to just buy a GBC and both of the GBC editions.
And I've already explained that during the actual presentation they said you would be able to play 100% of the game solo. They are NOT going to charge you a monthly fee to play the game solo, even in Japan. That would a completely idiotic business decision and no one would go for it. It is being built as a traditional RPG with MMO extras, not an all out MMO, so it would make no sense to charge a monthly fee unless you're playing the MMO aspect.Quote:
Originally Posted by BolivarI already posted a link where Square clarified that you need to be online to play past "the first few hours" of the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bastian
Not to mention that I very seriously doubt we will have to pay such a fee outside Japan. Your analogy with WoW and such makes no sense since DQX is NOT a full-on MMO. You CAN play it 100% completely solo. That is not an MMO. Thus it really would make more sense to follow the example of the only Wii RPG with MMO aspects. If there is a monthly fee in NA, I'll eat my hat (thank goodness I own no hats).
I understand you're referring to what they said during the conference. But this information comes from an FAQ posted on SE's website after the conference had ended, in order to clarify what people heard during the conference. And they clarified that you DO need to connect online in order to play past the first few hours and that you DO need to pay a fee in order to do so. The fact that this came after the conference with the intent of clarification leads me to believe that this is more accurate. Don't get me wrong, I hate this prospect as much as you do, not because I want to complain, but because I really want to play this game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bastian
You misunderstand my point, if these journalist were already bias back when Nintendo was on top of the market and still bashing it then, when their predictions of failure were mistaken for nearly two years, why is their rhetoric any more relevant now, since its obviously bias, and most of them hate the Wii?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bolivar
Smurf, by that example, you should finally agree that VII is overrated cause people have been saying that for years as well so it must be true they are right. Especially since that rhetoric has been goiging on in FF forums since VII came out. ;)
Tamagotchi is for all ages! Anyway... the market I'm talking about is simply the motion control one, the ability to interact with gaming, which had only been relegated to expensive peripherals with single purposes, course its not like the Wii doesn't fit that description either...Quote:
They did not create a new market. Adults were killing productivity at their jobs at sites like Addicting Games and Candy Stand long before Smart Phones and Nintendo monetized the casual experience. The other half of their market is younger children. I would argue the DS and Wii have simply been the apotheosis of the Nintendo experience, because Nintendo products always brought in young children (how old were we when we were glued to our GameBoys and GBCs?), it's just now they've made such quality titles and enough varied titles to spark any child's interest, that they've really smashed the sales charts. The one area where they have broke new ground is young girls and that is an accomplishment. I never understood the power of the DS until I realized I had just played NSMB with my two little girl cousins who both had DS' and were both under the age of 10. I badly want to discredit Nintendo's accomplishment in this area, but I can't. The one thing I can think of is Tamagachi but even that is questionable.
Still, I disagree that gamers have gotten older or younger. The older crowd now just has an outlet for it on one of the big 3 console manufacturers. And me and almost all of my friends have been playing video games as long as we've been old enough to hold and use a controller. But the young girls crowd? Yeah, Nintendo created that one. But I think they're losing it to Apple.
Honestly the Wii brought in elderly people which was pretty amusing (my own gma plays Wii bowling apparently) and I have gamer friends who have parents that bought the Wii for themselves, not for them, which is also amusing cause this revelation to me is usually followed by a "I smurfing hate the Wii" rant. I feel kids will always dabble into video games one way or another but to actually launch a console that entire non-typical demographs of people are buying into is pretty amazing and as I said, I feel it will have a greater social impact than the normal gaming market has the scope to see at this point, cause we're still stuck debating how the X-Box 720 is going to kick the PS4's ass in the next console war. I don't really see how bringing that many age groups and differing backgrounds is not somehow going to have a major social impact years down the road. Hell, our own parents most likely fed our gaming habits simply from the popularity of the arcade scene in the late 70s and the rise of the PC in the early 80s
They forgone those things cause they know its not needed to enjoy a game and technically the Wii accomplished its goal of creating a system that anyone can play and even today its still leading the market in sales and is close to becoming the second best selling non-portable console in gaming history. It's intuitive to anyone, and that is something that can't be said for anything the Big 3 has released in two decades. The Wii U still uses motion controls despite being developed more for hardcore gamers (oh Nintendo you silly goose, its not going to work) and I am not going to be surprised if both Sony and Microsoft mention that Move and Kinect type features will be coming packaged right into their next generation systems. Kinect itself has actually been a good seller for Microsoft, and it still holds a pretty good record for fastest selling peripheral reaching 8 million units sold in roughly 2 months. Its just Sony who doesn't know how to market motion gaming(it just reached the 8 million mark according to them at E311), but I'm pretty sure they will bring in their own version of Kinect utilizing the Eye Toy in the future. I find it amusing that the company that tried to bring forth the technology and actually has the better tech is kind of dead last in all this. Here I told myself I wasn't going to get into anymore console debates...Quote:
I think Nintendo kept the buttons and D-pads because there would lose so many developers. But really dude? You don't think Nintendo hailed touch and later motion inputs as the future of gaming? Do you really want me to dig up the quotables from Iwata, Miyamoto, and Reggie where they defensively explain why they've forgone better graphics and online connectivity (which they now have ironically embraced, relative to this thread)?Quote:
I think the idea of pure motion gaming is simply just hyberbole created by those game journalist you love so much to get more clicks on their webpage.
Also for touch... I just need to point out the iPad and the fact the Vita has two touch screens to pretty much show you that Nintendo got it right on that one. ;)
You have crappy role models. :eep:Quote:
And don't accuse me of loving those journalists, b. I've said in this thread and others that they're corny, historically inaccurate, biased, and flame baiting. Never confuse these dudes for my role models (those are Tetsuya Nomura and Yoshinori Kitase!!! :) )
Considering what else, Square had available at the time, I'd say its gameplay quality was no different from other Square games with FFT being the exception.Quote:
I assumed Square was creative. Because I just got to Disc 2 of Xenogears and I have to say: wow, dude. Wow. This is probably the most unfinished game I've ever played, although I like to say that Sakaguchi put Fei in his "Time-Out Chair" to tell his little story becasue the gameplay just wasn't up to Square quality :) . But I guess I could see how this is more of a budget/timing problem than creative interference. It's sad because I read Square was going to green-light a sequel if the game sold 1 million copies and it just hit 900,000 before they all decided to leave... sad.
I've also heard that resources were taken from the project to be given to FFVIII's development but who knows. If you ever rip all the info from Disc 2, you'll find a references to three more dungeons and some enemy types that never appeared in the game. If you ever check out Perfect Works the resource book, you'll see dozens of designs never used (including 2 Omni-Gears) and background info on the world and characters that were dropped entirely. Still, as an Eva fan, I thought it was a nice touch to simulate Evangelion's no-budget ending. At least Xenogears ending makes sense from the first viewing.
With this collection coming out, I would say your chances of a remake of the first three anytime soon is not likely. Maybe if SE finally released them for the iPhone I could see it happening. You might be waiting another five years or whenever SE needs to win back the Japanese market.Quote:
I'm gonna still hold out. This is the golden age of remakes, my friend, and I know sooner or later an awesome edition is going to come out with these games on it and commemorative artwork/memorabilia and it could even be for something I own. The portability is also an issue for me. Don't get me wrong, I loved playing Dragon Quest IV and V on the DS but as I learned with Shining Force II on the HD Sonic collection, these games were meant to be played on a TV. So we'll see.
WKC Was actually my first thought when seeing this. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno
On that note, I got II today! :D
Yay for Neo getting WKCII! I hope to get mine sooner rather than later so hopefully we can have some online adventures together!! :kakapo:
Wolf - I think we got off on the wrong foot. My point is that Nintendo is not likely to release the OpRainfall games because it would get marginal sales yet appease the media, which they could care less about because they've been bashing Ninty for years now. Which I'm confused - first you say they've only bashed Nintendo recently but now you admit they've been doing it for years. Which one is it, my devil's advocate? ;)
Again, as far as creating a demographic, I agree they've created some but I still believe they were simply able to monetize those people's gaming habits if not increase it. My grandfather used to play NHL with me on the Genesis from time to time.
Also have you changed your position on the "full motion input" approach by Nintendo again? Also, please don't evangelize Nintendo for popularizing touch. It's fairly obvious that Nintendo borrowed it from Palm, as well as the devices the word "tablet" used to describe.
My role models rock!
And you really think Xenogears gameplay was up to par with other Square titles at the time? Two words: customization system. As in, you know, Xenogears doesn't have one. Not to mention how little variety there are in the battles or how poor the difficulty is, especially its inability to scale. And if you thinking platforming only became an issue in the Tower of Babel you really need to replay that game, my friend. That was actually the best example of it because it was a scene built specifically for platforming instead of tacking it on. The puzzles are pretty bad as well. Like, really bad. Last, but not least, FF had been moving away from generic dungeon crawls since FFV. Xenogears' dungeons have little to offer other than blowing up your play time, it's clear the team was not acting on an urge to create compelling dungeons.
Anyway, I'm not going to be needing a I-III remake anytime soon. I got a good reading list of RPGs lined up, and DQVI DS, DQIX and a replay of VIII are all in order, and I'm hoping Square Enix releases Dragon Warrior VII as a PSOne Classic, which may be likely because there's apparently a really hardcore RPG fan deciding which games are brought over. I can wait on those games' inevitable Vita/DS/3DS/Wii/PSN remake.
Heyyo before I wrap this up I want to clarify that even if I was someone who lent credence to prevalent theories, I would NEVER go with the "FFVII is overrated" bandwagon. Mostly because in the 14 years of the game's iconic legacy, not a single argument has been able to refute its innovations and original contributions to gaming, or its historic place as a dramatic revolution!!!!1!!21!!!~~!!!!
The media's view of the Wii has largely depended on who you asked, so while some supposedly "non-bias" news outlets started on the bandwagon, and turned ugly, others have been doing it since day one cause well, they openly admit they belong to Sony and Microsoft.
While the big M certainly brought the tech to the forefront years before Nintendo, Nintendo's DS imo, bridged the gap of making the technology more respectable as a gaming unit, its not the second best selling gaming platform for nothing. Otherwise it would have stayed as an organization unit, with Pac-Man and Tetris as game diversions, like this tech usually does outside of Japan. Course, I tip my hat off to Apple and Squenix as well, who have actually been heavily supporting the iPad 2 with serious console ports of the early FF titles, FFIII DS port, Secret of Mana and now FFTactics. So while I can meet you half way that Nintendo certainly didn't do this all by themselves, I feel the mass appeal of the system and its contribution of showing gamers new ways to interact with games is not something to be glossed over.
One has made FF synonymous with crazy anime hair and belt buckles, the other made them synonymous with being easy interactive movies. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Bolivar
Actually it has an old school system of just your equipment, though the Gears actually get some interesting options if you play around with them; like giving Vierge an engine that offers more fuel for lower attack power so you can abuse her Aerods skill, or equipping Magnetic Coats that greatly raise your accuracy and evasion for your gears, or abusing the fact that some of your characters accessories actually affect their gears as well so its possible to beef up Ether skills or give your Gears free Booster ability, or even the Deathblower accessories that unlock the X attack for all your combo levels. Its not FFVI or VII, but this isn't a far cry from Chrono Trigger's system which did the job pretty nicely even if didn't have all the bells and whistles of the FF titles at the time, but we ignore the fact that most of those FF titles took a nosedive in difficulty, making customization a moot point beyond killing time.Quote:
And you really think Xenogears gameplay was up to par with other Square titles at the time? Two words: customization system. As in, you know, Xenogears doesn't have one.
This I feel is completely in line with Square titles at the time, difficulty pretty much died at the end of the 16-bit era and the 32-bit era seriously didn't do anything to fix it, in fact I would argue it just made it worse. FFVIII isn't exactly being touted as "most challenging game ever".Quote:
Not to mention how little variety there are in the battles or how poor the difficulty is, especially its inability to scale.
As for the battle system, try to name a game that had anything like Xenogears system that existed before 1998? Its battle system itself was unique cause all RPGs simply used menu based Turn based combat. Xenogears offered a level of interactivity that only FFVI at the time could barely choke up and say it does something on par with. Besides, you're a man who loves spectacle in your games, I figure you would enjoy the wire-fu. :p
Dude, I've played this game for like 10 years now, while I admit the platforming is not great, I don't actually have problems with it cause I gots skillz boy! :kakapo: Yet, I appreciate the fact the game included it cause it created a new means of exploring and interacting with the world. VII brought 3D visuals, but Xenogears actually brought RPGs into 3D gaming which the player could actually move around with and interact and be able to say you have true freedom of movement.Quote:
And if you thinking platforming only became an issue in the Tower of Babel you really need to replay that game, my friend. That was actually the best example of it because it was a scene built specifically for platforming instead of tacking it on.
I'll give you that one, but then again, there are only three RPG series that do them right: Lufia, Wild ARMS, and Golden Sun. You'll notice FF and Squenix in general is not part of that list. Simply because their use of puzzles is usually incredibly simple and serves to break up monotony, whereas the three games I mention, use them as true obstacles and integrate them into gameplay better. No one really remembers getting stuck on a puzzle in a Square game, but ask about puzzles in the other three and you'll get several people mentioning how creative or hair-pulling difficult the puzzles are in the other games I mentioned.Quote:
The puzzles are pretty bad as well. Like, really bad.
I would argue they were simply going by old school rules where Dungeons are giant labyrinths, granted Omegasols make this null and void in what these type of dungeon layouts were meant to be, but I actually like my dungeons to be long and maze like, even the linear ones like the one in Solaris is vast and large enough that meeting a fork in the road is enough to make you stop and ponder where you should go next. I feel dungeon design went down the crapper thanks to FF trying to move away from it to make the genre more appealing, and I don't feel making them visual set pieces like they are in VIII-X really gave them justice, and to me, that makes it feel more like padding cause they are short, usually straightforward, and accompanied by easy difficulty and highly exploitative battle systems that I sometimes wonder why the game designers bothered. I'd take getting lost in a Xenogears maze like dungeon slog, over walking ten minutes in a straight line on the Mi'hen Highroad or Mushroom Rock until I either trip over another cutscene or finally meet a boss. At least In Xenogears, I'm still doing something, even if it is simply trying to figure out where the exit is.Quote:
Last, but not least, FF had been moving away from generic dungeon crawls since FFV. Xenogears' dungeons have little to offer other than blowing up your play time, it's clear the team was not acting on an urge to create compelling dungeons.
I'm going to tell you now, if you find issues with all those elements in Xenogears, you are not going to like DQVII, if the game wasn't so damn huge, it could have been a 16-bit RPG. Still, I'll never grasp your love of DQ let alone DQVIII which I felt wasn't as good as its predecessors. To each their own I guess.Quote:
Anyway, I'm not going to be needing a I-III remake anytime soon. I got a good reading list of RPGs lined up, and DQVI DS, DQIX and a replay of VIII are all in order, and I'm hoping Square Enix releases Dragon Warrior VII as a PSOne Classic, which may be likely because there's apparently a really hardcore RPG fan deciding which games are brought over. I can wait on those games' inevitable Vita/DS/3DS/Wii/PSN remake.
And together with Kazushige Nojima, Hironobu Sakaguchi, and Nobuo Uematsu, they've revolutionized video games as we know them and took the medium to a new plateau the universe never could have predicted.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno
HAHAHAHA you actually win for this statement, but let me indulge:Quote:
Dude, I've played this game for like 10 years now, while I admit the platforming is not great, I don't actually have problems with it cause I gots skillz boy! :kakapo:
Customization System - accessories? Really? Most of the games we've brought up have customization systems and awesome accessory systems, namely FFVI which took it to the next level with all the equipment/acc combinations and quirky hidden side loot to fill it with :)
Difficulty - to me, the hallmark of difficulty in JRPGs boils down to one question: how quickly can you beat this game without grinding? If the difficulty isn't staying adequate enough just playing straight through, RUN! There's more than one reason the run command was integrated into random encounter systems, obviously it's not just for when you're too weak because you'd obviously die. I ran from every battle in the Sector 1 reactor and FFVII actually maintained a really decent difficulty all the way to the end of the game. It was awesome! FFVII 4 LYFE!!!
The problem with the Difficulty is also the Battle System - everything is designed to go down after 1 combo or slightly more. Very few enemies do something unique and usually it's a very cheap way to prolong the battle system, and it's horribly inbalanced so that things drag out for longer than they should in boring stalemates. But the worst part is that you're always engaging in the same EXACT lengthy animations over and over again. That's why FF and DQ are the masters - they know how not to waste your time. It's also hilarious how Xenogears tries to use camera angles like FFVII but it's always the same camera angle and to boot - i've noticed plenty of times where objects are in between the camera and the sprites, obscuring the action!
Puzzles don't have to be hair pulling or overly creative to be effective. They have to be just difficult and creative enough to make you feel like you've accomplished something. That's how you make great pacing. DQ games are littered with neat little novel puzzles that give you that feeling. And I don't think you're giving FF enough credit.
Some of the Dungeon design in FF has been insane, and incorporates puzzles in a lot of meaningful ways. I'm talking specifically about the multi-party dungeon crawls in FFVI, ESPECIALLY the final dungeon which had a lot of great switches, levers, and buttons to make it a great puzzle challenge. I guess I usually don't give VI enough credit because the game actually did a fantastic job at creating compelling dungeons all throughout the game. Then there's FFVIII, whose final dungeon is like a crowning achievement for the series at the time. Tons of great puzzles, a really huge castle.
I think making something a labyrinth, like Xenogears, is a cop-out, especially if that labyrinth isn't compelling. The Solaris trek had only 4-5 different room archetypes, many of which were empty, others with novel items, and still more with the "caged experiments" which was such lame side content. There was no reason to explore the labyrinth or even care what was out there. It was the definition of time waster.
Here's where we get to the heart of the thread. If DQVII has the same, novel challenges, delightful artwork, wonderful music, quirky dialogue, accessible combat, and constant feeling like you're really accomplishing something, whether it's levelling up or completing neat little puzzles or accomplishing major quests, I'm going to absolutely lose myself in a long journey like that. The DQ games are the opposite of what so many story-focused JRPGs like Xenogears do wrong. And that's take the time to make a good GAME. Because if you're just focusing in 100% on telling a compelling story, all your left with is a really great tale inside of a really bad GAME. I could go on for days about the beauty of DQ, but I'll save that for another day and just come to the realization that:Quote:
I'm going to tell you now, if you find issues with all those elements in Xenogears, you are not going to like DQVII, if the game wasn't so damn huge, it could have been a 16-bit RPG. Still, I'll never grasp your love of DQ let alone DQVIII which I felt wasn't as good as its predecessors. To each their own I guess.
An online game will have more focus on gameplay. I haven't played IX yet but I can only assume this online-only nature will be good for the title.
Unless you owned an SNES back in the 90s and watched the natural progression of the medium. I'm starting to think you Sega fans were just denied. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Bolivar
I kid, but I refuse to recognize Nojima cause the man has never written a decent story by himself.
I felt you would appreciate it. ;)Quote:
HAHAHAHA you actually win for this statement,Quote:
Dude, I've played this game for like 10 years now, while I admit the platforming is not great, I don't actually have problems with it cause I gots skillz scallywag! :kakapo:
Actually there is quite a few accessories and armor that grant special skills and abilities much like the Relics (granted they are hidden and acquired through special mini-games and side quests you probably didn't realize were available at the time), but I'll concede its not as good as VI's relic/Esper system or VII's materia in terms of deep customization system, but seeing how you like DQ, I'm surprised this would bother you so much. :pQuote:
Customization System - accessories? Really? Most of the games we've brought up have customization systems and awesome accessory systems, namely FFVI which took it to the next level with all the equipment/acc combinations and quirky hidden side loot to fill it with :)
Except you had to admit that you had to purposely weaken yer party to get this result by exploiting the running mechanic. While I can't argue against the reasoning, I would argue that this is more counter-intuitive than you would think.Quote:
Difficulty - to me, the hallmark of difficulty in JRPGs boils down to one question: how quickly can you beat this game without grinding? If the difficulty isn't staying adequate enough just playing straight through, RUN! There's more than one reason the run command was integrated into random encounter systems, obviously it's not just for when yer too weak because you'd obviously die. I ran from every battle in the Sector 1 reactor and FFVII actually maintained a really decent difficulty all the way to the end of the game. It was awesome! FFVII 4 LYFE!!!
Yet this brings me to my point about what FFVI, VII, Chrono Trigger, and early PS1 Square titles, is that Square shifted the series from being a difficult dungeon crawl and instead began to focus more on being about plot and story. Gameplay is not really rewarding in this era cause Square began to nerf combat so its faster so you can get thrown back into the story, which is basically the main contribution that Kitase, a man who has said he wanted to work in films, has brought to the genre. It makes the game more accessible but it detracts from the gameplay. The only way to get a challenge out of some of the games in the mid to late 90s is to purposely nerf yerself by either avoiding combat,and choosing not to use exploitative abilities and items. Basically you have to think counterintuitively from the way the designers wanted you to play the game in order to add in the element that they forgot to program in. In my opinion Xenogears is really no worse than VI/VII in this regard.Quote:
The problem with the Difficulty is also the Battle System - everything is designed to go down after 1 combo or slightly more. Very few enemies do something unique and usually it's a very cheap way to prolong the battle system, and it's horribly inbalanced so that things drag out for longer than they should in boring stalemates. But the worst part is that yer always engaging in the same EXACT lengthy animations over and over again. That's why FF and DQ are the masters - they know how not to waste yer time. It's also hilarious how Xenogears tries to use camera angles like FFVII but it's always the same camera angle and to boot - i've noticed plenty of times where objects are in between the camera and the sprites, obscuring the action!
Also, DQ is the last game I would mention in terms of not having battles that drag on forever. The battle system is always terribly slow and I about fell asleep in some of the boss fights in DQIV where I simply repeated the same strategy every round. They can also be exploited like having a MP restoring item equipped on a character who has the Lightning spells which are DQs equivalents of Flare and Ultima, with this set-up you can easily waltz through dungeons with just yer main hero nuking everything and getting his MP restored before the next battle ensues. Any RPG (hell games in general) can be easily exploited and made completely void of challenge if you know what you are doing and play around a bit. :D
I find DQ/FF puzzles to be pretty simple and not very satisfying at all. Its why I say that Lufia/Wild Arms/Golden Sun are the kings of this because they are challenging and create that sense of accomplishment you crave. While I feel their are some shining examples of puzzle work in DQ and FF, they are few and far between and often view them as how you view labyrinth dungeon design as being just filler. I give FF/DQ props for using them to break up the monotony of dungeon crawling which is the most I feel the puzzles can offer, but I would hardly say they were challenging let alone create a sense of accomplishment.Quote:
Puzzles don't have to be hair pulling or overly creative to be effective. They have to be just difficult and creative enough to make you feel like you've accomplished something. That's how you make great pacing. DQ games are littered with neat little novel puzzles that give you that feeling. And I don't think yer giving FF enough credit.
Maybe when I was 10, it may have created that sense but games like VI and VII are so old that I can't even remember if I had problems with any of the challenges beyond a bit of a time sink for the clock puzzle in Zozo, and the safe combination at Shin-Ra Manor in VII. The major problem with puzzles is that they are only good the first time, they don't have really good replay value unless you make sure to not touch a game for a decade or two.
To me, this is like comparing apples to oranges and personally I felt VIII only had maybe two good dungeons while the rest were simply straightforward slogs. VI/VII was the last of the inventive dungeon design for FF though IX had a few as well but it seems to me it has died within the mainline games. Once again, pointing out the direction towards more story focus and less game design. DQ itself is mostly a series that subscribes to the long winding labyrinth dungeon approach with a puzzle here and there to break up monotony, which once again, I feel Xenogears does as well. While I prefer more creative and interactive dungeons like the ones in VI/CT/VII my problem is that Square really never took off with this as much as they should have, and even when they try, its not as well implemented as these titles.Quote:
Some of the Dungeon design in FF has been insane, and incorporates puzzles in a lot of meaningful ways. I'm talking specifically about the multi-party dungeon crawls in FFVI, ESPECIALLY the final dungeon which had a lot of great switches, levers, and buttons to make it a great puzzle challenge. I guess I usually don't give VI enough credit because the game actually did a fantastic job at creating compelling dungeons all throughout the game. Then there's FFVIII, whose final dungeon is like a crowning achievement for the series at the time. Tons of great puzzles, a really huge castle.
Looking beyond Square and Enix, BoF/Wild ARMS and several other RPG titles had very creative dungeons inline with the VI/CT/VII and even Monolith Soft eventually got its act together by the third act of Xenosaga. Yet, I feel that the cinematic dungeon that serves only as a backdrop between cutscenes, popularized by FFX is more of the norm nowadays. How else could I be impressed with DQVIII's gameplay design when all it simply did is follow a formula that is as old as the genre? It just kind of shows how much the cinematics of the genre have taken over in terms of importance over well crafted gameplay and design.
I would argue you are simply looking at it from a pure gameplay view and not putting into account the story aspect of what was going on. yer trapped in the belly of the beast, yer on the run, learning Solaris' dirty secrets and now yer trapped in this maze where everything looks the same, and you are moving left and right, and wait... didn't I pass this corridor before? Let['s turn around, wait, I don't remember this...Quote:
I think making something a labyrinth, like Xenogears, is a cop-out, especially if that labyrinth isn't compelling. The Solaris trek had only 4-5 different room archetypes, many of which were empty, others with novel items, and still more with the "caged experiments" which was such lame side content. There was no reason to explore the labyrinth or even care what was out there. It was the definition of time waster.
The dungeon in my opinion is designed to fit the story, while I agree a better approach is to design a dungeon for entertainment, I do feel it has some merit as a storytelling devise, but I would argue moderation should always be uphold for this type of thing and I would concede that Gears fails in this regard.
As for the experiment room, once again, I feel this has more to do with the story than yer gameplay entertainment, it simply exists to tie in the Wels back to Solaris and give you a visual reminder of their importance.
Back to how this is different though, I feel that old style labyrinth type dungeons still have a place in RPGs as a medium as both the MegaTen titles and series like Etrian Odyssey and even DQ itself still hold onto this tradition, where Xenogears falters does come down to the combat being too easy and making Omegasols super cheap... These dungeons only work if the gameplay is built around a item/skill management system. I don't feel the dungeons are at fault but I would agree the easy gameplay is.
Quote:
I'm going to tell you now, if you find issues with all those elements in Xenogears, you are not going to like DQVII, if the game wasn't so damn huge, it could have been a 16-bit RPG. Still, I'll never grasp yer love of DQ let alone DQVIII which I felt wasn't as good as its predecessors. To each their own I guess.
Probably not on quirky dialogue but that's cause Enix had a pretty lousy translator. Though it easily wins for having the most eccentric and bizarre cast in the series. I blame that for why DQVIII's cast was made to be more sexy and charming. Course, DQVII has the better Demon Lord (and neither game can top Zoma for me) Just be careful cause the game is a time sink like no other, I think only Disgaea can boast more time needed to actually complete everything. Also, the beginning of the game is really really really slow.... it takes an average of two hours before you get into yer first battle. Still, I consider the game to be one of the better titles. It can't top DQIII as my fave title but its definetly my number two.Quote:
Here's where we get to the heart of the thread. If DQVII has the same, novel challenges, delightful artwork, wonderful music, quirky dialogue, accessible combat, and constant feeling like yer really accomplishing something, whether it's leveling up or completing neat little puzzles or accomplishing major quests, I'm going to absolutely lose myself in a long journey like that.
My issue with DQ actually comes from how flat the story and characters are. While I play the series for its charm and sticking to good fundamentals in gameplay, I can't help but feel the stories and characters do nothing for me. Most of the time, the stories are charming like a children's tale, at its best, it is clever which is what I give props for DQIII and DQVII for being, but overall, I can't get caught up in the tales like I can with the FF series, when bad things happen to the cast, I don't bat an eye, but I still haven't forgiven Yuffie for stealing my materia that cheap smurfing whore. I always felt that DQs plot and characters are adequate at best, but they can never stand next to people like Cecil, Fei Fong Wong and Ashley Riot for me in terms of depth and endearment. I feel the DQIII's connection in the Loto Arc is one of the most clever stories in gaming, but its not as gripping and thought provoking as Chrono Cross or BoFIII.Quote:
The DQ games are the opposite of what so many story-focused JRPGs like Xenogears do wrong. And that's take the time to make a good GAME. Because if yer just focusing in 100% on telling a compelling story, all yer left with is a really great tale inside of a really bad GAME. I could go on for days about the beauty of DQ, but I'll save that for another day and just come to the realization that:
Its why DQ will never be as good as some series for me. Like FF in the later years, I feel that DQ only has the perfect game formula done half right. Still, I find its more simple and charming stories to be refreshing from time to time, cause too many RPGs do try too hard to be pseudo-intellectual nowadays and its nice to play something that doesn't takes itself so serious.
Most likely, it will be interesting to see how this is going to pan out cause it seems like a weird combo of DQIX meets FFXI.Quote:
An online game will have more focus on gameplay. I haven't played IX yet but I can only assume this online-only nature will be good for the title.
I think, to me, the quality of a video game is viewed on a circle with each element going in different directions from the center: gameplay, art, story, music, etc. You may actually be onto something with us Sega kids - Shining Force is what really got me into this genre. The gameplay isn't as deep as other SRPGs, the story is your standard DQ fare, but those two are just good enough, and the music, artwork, and presentation are so smurfing delightful that it blends together and stays with you as an extremely powerful experience. This is probably why Dragon Quest ended up being one of my favorite series', as I see it having similar strengths/weaknesses to SForce. But I also believe these games are far better balanced than many Square titles from the 90s. All the numbers begin under 20, you can actually see how you're progressing and by how much, you can appreciate that increment and play around with it because it's not just random numbers in the hundreds or thousands and the majority of enemies aren't designed for one hit kills.
Xenogears is a game, on the circle described above, whose radius goes extremely far towards story, a good amount towards music, but nearly every other category suffers. I don't regret playing it - it proved to me that gameplay doesn't matter. It really doesn't. You can have a game like Gears of War that really perfects the gameplay of its genre, innovates a lot of original elements, and even shows you the direction games are heading for the next few years. But a game with a compelling story and and powerful presentation will beat it out everytime as the more memorable experience. I'm getting ready for the final dungeon, I believe, and I'm excited to see it all wrap up, and a little sad to finish the journey, but I'm also looking forward to getting into games with more compelling gameplay (probably gonna pick back up Valkyria Chronicles II on PSP). I'm older now and I need something more from my RPGs to make it worth my while.