Xenosaga Ep. II reviews are up.
It scored a 7.8 on Gamespot. They said it still has an extremely detailed story driven plot. But that for the most part this Ep. is spent getting to know the characters than it is in moving the story forward.
They said by the end you will have a much better idea to who the characters are but that you will get the feeling that not a whole lot happened during the plot of the game.
I've been reading reviews for a few days, and the majority of them point out flaws in the game that are disheartening.
It saddens me greatly considering I've been looking forward to this game more than any other game for a couple hears (moreso than any FF game, Metroid Prime 2, or any number of others). The only game I might be more excited for at this point is the new GameCube Zelda.
A good number of the reviews I've read have summarized that the gameplay overall has been altered into a less enjoyable system dealing with enemy weaknesses, and more importantly, is dumbed down greatly, taking away much of the depth that was found in Episode 1. Reviewers make it sound, comparatively speaking, incredibly simplified. This will bother me more than anything.
In addition, I hear the plot, while good, actually asks more questions than it answers. I was really hoping for the majority of the holes to be filled by the end of Episode II, because with the current part of the story arch ending with the next episode, I'm skepticle as to whether they can pull it off in the length of one more game.
Finally, I hear it's short. Like, half the length of the first one. I personally like long games, and the short length of Episode II only leaves less opportunity for the story to develop further.
Nevertheless, I'm sure I'll enjoy it. A few reviews generally aren't upsetting to me, but the flaws I've mentioned are common in every one that I've read so far, and they're in relation to the aspect of the first game that I favored the most. A bad battle system is what I'm worried about above all else. But I'll buy it and have fun with it, regardless.
Last edited by Sepho; 02-15-2005 at 03:35 PM. Reason: By "gameplay" I meant "battle system"
Xenosaga 1 was a 24 hour game. If this is 20 hours like everyone said then it isn't going to be much shorter at all.
The battle system from last time had depth but everyone only talked about the the magic system. The magic system before allowed everyone to learn everything except for a few spells. Same this time around so I fail to see the compairison on that one.
I think they will pull it off in one more game. I do believe episode III will not see release on the PS2 but on a later system.
7.8 it a decent rating, and I've always prefered to allow my own judgement to overrule any rating that a game might be given.
I really don't believe any ratings these places give games.
I hold my games to different standards. Many places rates Star Ocean as a sub-par game, but I find myself enjoying it more than any other game this generation. I would consider ratings more as guidelines than actual judges of a game's worth.
I will be picking this game up regardless of the ratings. I'll even make it my objective to put down Halo 2 for the two weeks it will take me to finish it.
To hell with Battletoads and Double Dragon.
THIS is the ultimate team.
I really want this game, but because of tghe reviews, I was beginning to say, "I think i'll save up my money for Dante's Awakening." One review said that XenoII has dropped to Devil May Cry II proportions and that no one has their own ubnique skills anymore. Sure, you can choose form a selection of ether attacks, but it's all the same. And they said, "Prepare to forget why KOS-MOS kicked ass"
*You know it's over, growing colder, I need something, leads me next to nothing...*
*All we ever wanted, I need something, leads me next to nothing...*
Ugh.Originally Posted by Behold the Void
I don't look at the scores, just the reviews. They are, regardless of the rating, useful at helping you decide (based on what they say about he games pros and cons) what to expect from the game. I think the ratings given out by mainstream publications are nearly always ridiculous. For some reason, magazines seem to have this problem more than any other medium. The fact that both Halo games, especially the first - which is a very flawed game - received perfect scores from every game magazine I've read is enough evidence for this.
That's the thing I've read that has me worried the most. From what I understand, you can't learn techniques anymore. You're stuck with a set ability set throughout the course of the game.
I will still enjoy it because what is really most important to me and the only thing I really care about in a game is its story. And they said it is still has a very solid story.
On a side note though, think about how much more effort gaming companies have to put into their games because of the review sites. Fifteen years ago or so people basically bought games based upon how cool they thought the cover was, not on how good the game really was.
That's what I read and i'm worried. but my friend said, "the only opinion that counts is your own." so i'm going to buy the game, try it out and if i don't like it, i'll return it
*You know it's over, growing colder, I need something, leads me next to nothing...*
*All we ever wanted, I need something, leads me next to nothing...*
No one had unique skillz in episode I either. What the hell are you people talking about?
but they're techs were their own; Jr and his Coin Snap; Storm Waltz, angelic requiem. Chaos and his Lunar Seal KOS-MOS and her R Cannon, R Dragon and so on and so on, that's what we mean. you might mean ether skills where you can share them
*You know it's over, growing colder, I need something, leads me next to nothing...*
*All we ever wanted, I need something, leads me next to nothing...*
Okay, and those have been replaced with double techs. Do you consider those not to be unique? And for the most part, everyone did have the same abilities in the first game. Maybe not so much tech wise, but definitely for Ether.
Honestly, the only differences I noticed in the game were regarding the new weak point strategy of the enemies and boosting. Also, the doing away with armor and weapons. Otherwise, there isn't much of a difference in the battle system therefore, very hard to critique as a comparison.
I mean that the characters no longer have a wide selection of independent techs, but are forced to pair up for double techs. now, the characters have no indivisuality because of the double tech, like they did in the first episode, where their attacks showed and gave them characteristics and things. I loved Chaos because of his special attacks and unique moves such as Lunar Seal, but now that they've taken all of their signature moves *wouldn't really call it that but* it's almost like loosing something that have grown with the characters or somthing. It'll be wierd, for sure, but that doesn't mean i won't give it a go to see.
*You know it's over, growing colder, I need something, leads me next to nothing...*
*All we ever wanted, I need something, leads me next to nothing...*
So the question becomes then, does the uniqueness of a character come from different attacks or the personality and storyline given to that character throughout the game? Personally, I don't see chaos losing any of his character to his lack of individual tech attacks. His place in the story keeps him as questionable as ever.
The main reason I play Xenogears is for the storyline anyways. I must say though sometimes the battles get kind of tedious, so I hope the new system doesn't make it more so.
I am REALLY looking forward to ditching those crappy AGWS though.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
