Rei no Otaku
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 3 (100%)
Don't get me wrong. Chrono Cross is an excellent game. It's just not the sequel we were looking for.
Chrono Trigger DS Thread - E3 Impressions Post #272
- Thread starter MarkMan
- Start date
[quote name='Rei no Otaku']Don't get me wrong. Chrono Cross is an excellent game. It's just not the sequel we were looking for.[/QUOTE]
I think that was the problem with most people who played CC. They wanted and expected it to be Chrono Trigger 2 even though the team developing it had changed quite a bit since developing CT.
I think that was the problem with most people who played CC. They wanted and expected it to be Chrono Trigger 2 even though the team developing it had changed quite a bit since developing CT.
[quote name='Rei no Otaku']Chrono Cross had dual and triple techs. In fact Serge and Glenn can do the cross slash.[/quote]
yes it did, and I loved Chrono Cross
but double and triple techs in Chrono Trigger were a core part of the game, not just a cool added ability.
yes it did, and I loved Chrono Cross
but double and triple techs in Chrono Trigger were a core part of the game, not just a cool added ability.
[quote name='willardhaven']Cross was in many ways the perfect sequel, ladies.[/QUOTE]
The story was poor, even the developers admit they screwed it up. I read an interview with them awhile back where they talked about how the game was rushed to release so they cut alot of stuff out and altered alot of other stuff that wasnt complte and as a result we have this convoluted plot full of holes. Then again like I said the game had a larger cast.......yet it had less double and triple techs. Then you look at the color system which was just a mess and then the fact that half the damn characters played the exact way.
The game was from an objective stand point a freaking mess and it was largly due to the fact it had a rushed release. I was ok with it not being CT 2....but the game just had too many problems and if it wasnt for the fact that it beared the Chrono name I bet it would have gotten a 7.5-7.8 and been forgotten like better games of the time(believe Wild Arms 2 came out around that time and was ignored).
The story was poor, even the developers admit they screwed it up. I read an interview with them awhile back where they talked about how the game was rushed to release so they cut alot of stuff out and altered alot of other stuff that wasnt complte and as a result we have this convoluted plot full of holes. Then again like I said the game had a larger cast.......yet it had less double and triple techs. Then you look at the color system which was just a mess and then the fact that half the damn characters played the exact way.
The game was from an objective stand point a freaking mess and it was largly due to the fact it had a rushed release. I was ok with it not being CT 2....but the game just had too many problems and if it wasnt for the fact that it beared the Chrono name I bet it would have gotten a 7.5-7.8 and been forgotten like better games of the time(believe Wild Arms 2 came out around that time and was ignored).
Last edited by a moderator:
willardhaven
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 12 (100%)
It had different strengths than Chrono Trigger. It was definitely out there and lacked refinement in its mechanics, but it surpassed many games out at the time.
1. No random encounters, which are as big of an "objective" design flaw as you can get.
2. Perfect musical direction and graphics that still hold up to this day (unlike many 2000 PS1 games).
3. Fast-paced gameplay with relatively good controls (another thing PS1 sorely lacked).
Wild ARMs 2 was forgotten because it sucked.
I really wanted to see the fan made Chrono Trigger remake drop, but I guess we'll have to wait for SE to do it (maybe in another 5 years). While I agree that the game is quite good as it is, I'd love to see some stylized 3D interpretations.
It would be really awesome if SE started a free/insured battery replacement program for the SNES cart.
I have the PS1 version also, what was changed in that aside from the cartoons tacked on?
1. No random encounters, which are as big of an "objective" design flaw as you can get.
2. Perfect musical direction and graphics that still hold up to this day (unlike many 2000 PS1 games).
3. Fast-paced gameplay with relatively good controls (another thing PS1 sorely lacked).
Wild ARMs 2 was forgotten because it sucked.
I really wanted to see the fan made Chrono Trigger remake drop, but I guess we'll have to wait for SE to do it (maybe in another 5 years). While I agree that the game is quite good as it is, I'd love to see some stylized 3D interpretations.
It would be really awesome if SE started a free/insured battery replacement program for the SNES cart.
I have the PS1 version also, what was changed in that aside from the cartoons tacked on?
[quote name='willardhaven']It had different strengths than Chrono Trigger. It was definitely out there and lacked refinement in its mechanics, but it surpassed many games out at the time.
1. No random encounters, which are as big of an "objective" design flaw as you can get.
2. Perfect musical direction and graphics that still hold up to this day (unlike many 2000 PS1 games).
3. Fast-paced gameplay with relatively good controls (another thing PS1 sorely lacked).
Wild ARMs 2 was forgotten because it sucked.
I really wanted to see the fan made Chrono Trigger remake drop, but I guess we'll have to wait for SE to do it (maybe in another 5 years). While I agree that the game is quite good as it is, I'd love to see some stylized 3D interpretations.
It would be really awesome if SE started a free/insured battery replacement program for the SNES cart.
I have the PS1 version also, what was changed in that aside from the cartoons tacked on?[/QUOTE]
1. I hate random battles but its hardly an objective complaint. Its not a mechanic of the game that is inherently better or worse in the sense of being able to pick it out as a flaw. In fact some gamers prefer them.
2. Music is objective. I liked CC soundtrack but music is not something you can really objectively view.
3. Ummmm its battle system was no different then most others of the era. Say what you will but it functioned the same as others such as WA2(which atleast its swapping, morphing and a number of other features gave more depth).
And speaking of WA2 again its story wasn't convoluted and in fact was told well so its one up on CC there. Its music wasnt bad, its setting was different then other RPGs and its skill system blew CCs out of the water.
Again say what you want but you with your post are showing that your just judging things based on hwo much you like set things not trying to look at it objectively at all.
1. No random encounters, which are as big of an "objective" design flaw as you can get.
2. Perfect musical direction and graphics that still hold up to this day (unlike many 2000 PS1 games).
3. Fast-paced gameplay with relatively good controls (another thing PS1 sorely lacked).
Wild ARMs 2 was forgotten because it sucked.
I really wanted to see the fan made Chrono Trigger remake drop, but I guess we'll have to wait for SE to do it (maybe in another 5 years). While I agree that the game is quite good as it is, I'd love to see some stylized 3D interpretations.
It would be really awesome if SE started a free/insured battery replacement program for the SNES cart.
I have the PS1 version also, what was changed in that aside from the cartoons tacked on?[/QUOTE]
1. I hate random battles but its hardly an objective complaint. Its not a mechanic of the game that is inherently better or worse in the sense of being able to pick it out as a flaw. In fact some gamers prefer them.
2. Music is objective. I liked CC soundtrack but music is not something you can really objectively view.
3. Ummmm its battle system was no different then most others of the era. Say what you will but it functioned the same as others such as WA2(which atleast its swapping, morphing and a number of other features gave more depth).
And speaking of WA2 again its story wasn't convoluted and in fact was told well so its one up on CC there. Its music wasnt bad, its setting was different then other RPGs and its skill system blew CCs out of the water.
Again say what you want but you with your post are showing that your just judging things based on hwo much you like set things not trying to look at it objectively at all.
[quote name='MSI Magus']
3. Ummmm its battle system was no different then most others of the era. Say what you will but it functioned the same as others such as WA2(which atleast its swapping, morphing and a number of other features gave more depth).
And speaking of WA2 again its story wasn't convoluted and in fact was told well so its one up on CC there. Its music wasnt bad, its setting was different then other RPGs and its skill system blew CCs out of the water.[/QUOTE]
I wouldn't say it was the same as others... I mean, it had the same basics but not completely the same considering techs and magic systems. I don't remember WA2 too well though and I just can't remember anything that made it anything like CC. I remember playing WA2 after CC but I never got very far (2nd or 3rd boss) in WA2 so maybe I missed it?
And I wouldn't say CC was convoluted (had to look that one up) as much as it wasn't dumbed down... time/dimension traveling isn't exactly a simple matter.
3. Ummmm its battle system was no different then most others of the era. Say what you will but it functioned the same as others such as WA2(which atleast its swapping, morphing and a number of other features gave more depth).
And speaking of WA2 again its story wasn't convoluted and in fact was told well so its one up on CC there. Its music wasnt bad, its setting was different then other RPGs and its skill system blew CCs out of the water.[/QUOTE]
I wouldn't say it was the same as others... I mean, it had the same basics but not completely the same considering techs and magic systems. I don't remember WA2 too well though and I just can't remember anything that made it anything like CC. I remember playing WA2 after CC but I never got very far (2nd or 3rd boss) in WA2 so maybe I missed it?
And I wouldn't say CC was convoluted (had to look that one up) as much as it wasn't dumbed down... time/dimension traveling isn't exactly a simple matter.
willardhaven
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 12 (100%)
[quote name='MSI Magus']The story was poor, even the developers admit they screwed it up. I read an interview with them awhile back where they talked about how the game was rushed to release so they cut alot of stuff out and altered alot of other stuff that wasnt complte and as a result we have this convoluted plot full of holes. Then again like I said the game had a larger cast.......yet it had less double and triple techs. Then you look at the color system which was just a mess and then the fact that half the damn characters played the exact way.
The game was from an objective stand point a freaking mess and it was largly due to the fact it had a rushed release. I was ok with it not being CT 2....but the game just had too many problems and if it wasnt for the fact that it beared the Chrono name I bet it would have gotten a 7.5-7.8 and been forgotten like better games of the time(believe Wild Arms 2 came out around that time and was ignored).[/quote]
[quote name='MSI Magus']1. I hate random battles but its hardly an objective complaint. Its not a mechanic of the game that is inherently better or worse in the sense of being able to pick it out as a flaw. In fact some gamers prefer them.
2. Music is objective. I liked CC soundtrack but music is not something you can really objectively view.
3. Ummmm its battle system was no different then most others of the era. Say what you will but it functioned the same as others such as WA2(which atleast its swapping, morphing and a number of other features gave more depth).
And speaking of WA2 again its story wasn't convoluted and in fact was told well so its one up on CC there. Its music wasnt bad, its setting was different then other RPGs and its skill system blew CCs out of the water.
Again say what you want but you with your post are showing that your just judging things based on hwo much you like set things not trying to look at it objectively at all.[/quote]
First of all, I quoted objective because everything both of us are saying is subjective, it's silly to try and argue that. "Objectively" Chrono Cross would win over many games on the same tier since it has technically superior graphics and sound, with more responsive controls.
People who prefer random battles are not being "objective" as you say. choosing whether or not to engage an enemy is obviously a more sound design choice than bogging down the game's pace with random teleportation.
Musical taste is objective, but the quality of the music's production beats any game you throw out from the PS1 era. So if you want to go by technical merits, CC is the best Japanese RPG of its generation musically.
Chrono Cross featured battles you could escape from at any time (including boss fights), which I've never seen in another game. Also, the speed of battle is unparalleled (you can't just spam items like most Japanese RPGs). It isn't perfect, but it stands toe to toe with the PS2 eras incredible lineup of Japanese RPGs (Wild ARMs 2 doesn't really hold up anymore).
Yes, the story is in-depth. Just as you can argue that random battles are some people's preferences, I can argue that some people like detailed narratives. Everything we're saying is subjective, you just seem to think it isn't in your case good sir.
This is off topic, so we should probably stop. It's fun to argue over games sometimes though. In real life there are few people who actually feel like wasting their time doing this.
The game was from an objective stand point a freaking mess and it was largly due to the fact it had a rushed release. I was ok with it not being CT 2....but the game just had too many problems and if it wasnt for the fact that it beared the Chrono name I bet it would have gotten a 7.5-7.8 and been forgotten like better games of the time(believe Wild Arms 2 came out around that time and was ignored).[/quote]
[quote name='MSI Magus']1. I hate random battles but its hardly an objective complaint. Its not a mechanic of the game that is inherently better or worse in the sense of being able to pick it out as a flaw. In fact some gamers prefer them.
2. Music is objective. I liked CC soundtrack but music is not something you can really objectively view.
3. Ummmm its battle system was no different then most others of the era. Say what you will but it functioned the same as others such as WA2(which atleast its swapping, morphing and a number of other features gave more depth).
And speaking of WA2 again its story wasn't convoluted and in fact was told well so its one up on CC there. Its music wasnt bad, its setting was different then other RPGs and its skill system blew CCs out of the water.
Again say what you want but you with your post are showing that your just judging things based on hwo much you like set things not trying to look at it objectively at all.[/quote]
First of all, I quoted objective because everything both of us are saying is subjective, it's silly to try and argue that. "Objectively" Chrono Cross would win over many games on the same tier since it has technically superior graphics and sound, with more responsive controls.
People who prefer random battles are not being "objective" as you say. choosing whether or not to engage an enemy is obviously a more sound design choice than bogging down the game's pace with random teleportation.
Musical taste is objective, but the quality of the music's production beats any game you throw out from the PS1 era. So if you want to go by technical merits, CC is the best Japanese RPG of its generation musically.
Chrono Cross featured battles you could escape from at any time (including boss fights), which I've never seen in another game. Also, the speed of battle is unparalleled (you can't just spam items like most Japanese RPGs). It isn't perfect, but it stands toe to toe with the PS2 eras incredible lineup of Japanese RPGs (Wild ARMs 2 doesn't really hold up anymore).
Yes, the story is in-depth. Just as you can argue that random battles are some people's preferences, I can argue that some people like detailed narratives. Everything we're saying is subjective, you just seem to think it isn't in your case good sir.
This is off topic, so we should probably stop. It's fun to argue over games sometimes though. In real life there are few people who actually feel like wasting their time doing this.
BlueLobstah
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 17 (100%)
In other news... flash Intro/CT Site debuts in Japan: http://www.chronotrigger.jp/
In all honesty, Chrono Trigger is a tough act to follow. Had Chrono Cross not been a sequel to Chrono Trigger, I think it would have been held in much higher regard than it usually is due to the disappointment following Chrono Trigger. It's held under much scrutiny due to the fact that it does follow Chrono Trigger, and sometimes really is a shame that it doesn't get the praise it does deserve.
I'm glad that the DS iteration of Chrono Trigger is just a port and not a remake. There's so many things that the game did just right, it would be hard to see it in any other light.
In all honesty, Chrono Trigger is a tough act to follow. Had Chrono Cross not been a sequel to Chrono Trigger, I think it would have been held in much higher regard than it usually is due to the disappointment following Chrono Trigger. It's held under much scrutiny due to the fact that it does follow Chrono Trigger, and sometimes really is a shame that it doesn't get the praise it does deserve.
I'm glad that the DS iteration of Chrono Trigger is just a port and not a remake. There's so many things that the game did just right, it would be hard to see it in any other light.
[quote name='willardhaven']First of all, I quoted objective because everything both of us are saying is subjective, it's silly to try and argue that. "Objectively" Chrono Cross would win over many games on the same tier since it has technically superior graphics and sound, with more responsive controls.
People who prefer random battles are not being "objective" as you say. choosing whether or not to engage an enemy is obviously a more sound design choice than bogging down the game's pace with random teleportation.
Musical taste is objective, but the quality of the music's production beats any game you throw out from the PS1 era. So if you want to go by technical merits, CC is the best Japanese RPG of its generation musically.
Chrono Cross featured battles you could escape from at any time (including boss fights), which I've never seen in another game. Also, the speed of battle is unparalleled (you can't just spam items like most Japanese RPGs). It isn't perfect, but it stands toe to toe with the PS2 eras incredible lineup of Japanese RPGs (Wild ARMs 2 doesn't really hold up anymore).
Yes, the story is in-depth. Just as you can argue that random battles are some people's preferences, I can argue that some people like detailed narratives. Everything we're saying is subjective, you just seem to think it isn't in your case good sir.
This is off topic, so we should probably stop. It's fun to argue over games sometimes though. In real life there are few people who actually feel like wasting their time doing this.[/QUOTE]
I didnt say people that preffer a certain type of battle are being ojbective. However it is possible to objectivly look at video game quality....hell its what reviewers are supposed to do.
You stating Wild Arms 2 holds up isnt objective.
You stating that CC music is perfect is so unobjective its a joke.
Stating non random battles is better is not objective.
Stuff like a plot hole however is objective. And when you stand back and look at Chrono Cross objectivly it becomes very easy to spot quite a few flaws. I will never change your mind(its rare to change anyones minds on anything). But honestly, when a developer of a game calls it a flawed release and admits it was due to a rushed release. You have already lost any objective creditability. CC was flawed regardless of what you say, its easy to spot.
WA2 was far from perfect, but thats why I named it. Because even though it wasnt a AAA release it came out and was overlooked because it wasnt a big name. However it was still a solid quality title with few objective flaws.....but you wont be able to see this since as your posts in the other RPG topic have shown you tend to only like really weird games that try to overacheive and fall flat on their face like Radiata Stories
People who prefer random battles are not being "objective" as you say. choosing whether or not to engage an enemy is obviously a more sound design choice than bogging down the game's pace with random teleportation.
Musical taste is objective, but the quality of the music's production beats any game you throw out from the PS1 era. So if you want to go by technical merits, CC is the best Japanese RPG of its generation musically.
Chrono Cross featured battles you could escape from at any time (including boss fights), which I've never seen in another game. Also, the speed of battle is unparalleled (you can't just spam items like most Japanese RPGs). It isn't perfect, but it stands toe to toe with the PS2 eras incredible lineup of Japanese RPGs (Wild ARMs 2 doesn't really hold up anymore).
Yes, the story is in-depth. Just as you can argue that random battles are some people's preferences, I can argue that some people like detailed narratives. Everything we're saying is subjective, you just seem to think it isn't in your case good sir.
This is off topic, so we should probably stop. It's fun to argue over games sometimes though. In real life there are few people who actually feel like wasting their time doing this.[/QUOTE]
I didnt say people that preffer a certain type of battle are being ojbective. However it is possible to objectivly look at video game quality....hell its what reviewers are supposed to do.
You stating Wild Arms 2 holds up isnt objective.
You stating that CC music is perfect is so unobjective its a joke.
Stating non random battles is better is not objective.
Stuff like a plot hole however is objective. And when you stand back and look at Chrono Cross objectivly it becomes very easy to spot quite a few flaws. I will never change your mind(its rare to change anyones minds on anything). But honestly, when a developer of a game calls it a flawed release and admits it was due to a rushed release. You have already lost any objective creditability. CC was flawed regardless of what you say, its easy to spot.
WA2 was far from perfect, but thats why I named it. Because even though it wasnt a AAA release it came out and was overlooked because it wasnt a big name. However it was still a solid quality title with few objective flaws.....but you wont be able to see this since as your posts in the other RPG topic have shown you tend to only like really weird games that try to overacheive and fall flat on their face like Radiata Stories
willardhaven
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 12 (100%)
[quote name='BlueLobstah']
I'm glad that the DS iteration of Chrono Trigger is just a port and not a remake. There's so many things that the game did just right, it would be hard to see it in any other light.[/quote]
It would be so cool if they pulled a Capcom and did a 2D remake on PS2 with high definition sprites.
I'm glad that the DS iteration of Chrono Trigger is just a port and not a remake. There's so many things that the game did just right, it would be hard to see it in any other light.[/quote]
It would be so cool if they pulled a Capcom and did a 2D remake on PS2 with high definition sprites.
[quote name='BlueLobstah']In other news... flash Intro/CT Site debuts in Japan: http://www.chronotrigger.jp/
In all honesty, Chrono Trigger is a tough act to follow. Had Chrono Cross not been a sequel to Chrono Trigger, I think it would have been held in much higher regard than it usually is due to the disappointment following Chrono Trigger. It's held under much scrutiny due to the fact that it does follow Chrono Trigger, and sometimes really is a shame that it doesn't get the praise it does deserve.
I'm glad that the DS iteration of Chrono Trigger is just a port and not a remake. There's so many things that the game did just right, it would be hard to see it in any other light.[/QUOTE]
Seriously? Think back CC reviews were largly high 8s and 9s. Any other game that came out with as many problems with its plot would never have received that. It was blasted by fans yes, and many of them were being unfair calling it horrid and such. But as many people as there are that do that there are just as many that overinflate its quality due to CT.
I think CC is like FFVIII. It tried some new stuff and it had a huge name behind it(and VIII was rushed to release as well causing flaws in it). As a result it split the fanbase. Half the people loved its innovation and what it attempted to do, they refuse to see the flaws of the game because of this love. The other half wanted a more traditional release which they didnt get so they focus completely on the negative overlooking the positive aspects of the release.
I think looking at Squares releases at that time they were at a transition period where they were trying to do too much that was too new and get these games out too fast. There were alot of great ideas in that mid generation PS1 era from them.....but most just didnt deliver.
In all honesty, Chrono Trigger is a tough act to follow. Had Chrono Cross not been a sequel to Chrono Trigger, I think it would have been held in much higher regard than it usually is due to the disappointment following Chrono Trigger. It's held under much scrutiny due to the fact that it does follow Chrono Trigger, and sometimes really is a shame that it doesn't get the praise it does deserve.
I'm glad that the DS iteration of Chrono Trigger is just a port and not a remake. There's so many things that the game did just right, it would be hard to see it in any other light.[/QUOTE]
Seriously? Think back CC reviews were largly high 8s and 9s. Any other game that came out with as many problems with its plot would never have received that. It was blasted by fans yes, and many of them were being unfair calling it horrid and such. But as many people as there are that do that there are just as many that overinflate its quality due to CT.
I think CC is like FFVIII. It tried some new stuff and it had a huge name behind it(and VIII was rushed to release as well causing flaws in it). As a result it split the fanbase. Half the people loved its innovation and what it attempted to do, they refuse to see the flaws of the game because of this love. The other half wanted a more traditional release which they didnt get so they focus completely on the negative overlooking the positive aspects of the release.
I think looking at Squares releases at that time they were at a transition period where they were trying to do too much that was too new and get these games out too fast. There were alot of great ideas in that mid generation PS1 era from them.....but most just didnt deliver.
BlueLobstah
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 17 (100%)
[quote name='MSI Magus']Seriously? Think back CC reviews were largly high 8s and 9s. Any other game that came out with as many problems with its plot would never have received that. It was blasted by fans yes, and many of them were being unfair calling it horrid and such. But as many people as there are that do that there are just as many that overinflate its quality due to CT.
I think CC is like FFVIII. It tried some new stuff and it had a huge name behind it(and VIII was rushed to release as well causing flaws in it). As a result it split the fanbase. Half the people loved its innovation and what it attempted to do, they refuse to see the flaws of the game because of this love. The other half wanted a more traditional release which they didnt get so they focus completely on the negative overlooking the positive aspects of the release.
I think looking at Squares releases at that time they were at a transition period where they were trying to do too much that was too new and get these games out too fast. There were alot of great ideas in that mid generation PS1 era from them.....but most just didnt deliver.[/QUOTE]
By no means is the game perfect, the game was rated fairly high with most publications. But from what I see, a lot of Chrono Trigger fan's dislike the game because of the developers trying something different. Had the game not been "Chrono Trigger 2", but under a different IP I believe that fans of Chrono Trigger would have enjoyed it more without the stigma of being Chrono Trigger. It looks like we mostly agree, our wording was just a little different.
I recall the game having flaws, but nothing glaring enough that really comes to my mind anymore. Maybe nostalgia has overlooked what is there, but in either case it still remains one of my favorite JRPGs of the PSone era.
I think CC is like FFVIII. It tried some new stuff and it had a huge name behind it(and VIII was rushed to release as well causing flaws in it). As a result it split the fanbase. Half the people loved its innovation and what it attempted to do, they refuse to see the flaws of the game because of this love. The other half wanted a more traditional release which they didnt get so they focus completely on the negative overlooking the positive aspects of the release.
I think looking at Squares releases at that time they were at a transition period where they were trying to do too much that was too new and get these games out too fast. There were alot of great ideas in that mid generation PS1 era from them.....but most just didnt deliver.[/QUOTE]
By no means is the game perfect, the game was rated fairly high with most publications. But from what I see, a lot of Chrono Trigger fan's dislike the game because of the developers trying something different. Had the game not been "Chrono Trigger 2", but under a different IP I believe that fans of Chrono Trigger would have enjoyed it more without the stigma of being Chrono Trigger. It looks like we mostly agree, our wording was just a little different.
I recall the game having flaws, but nothing glaring enough that really comes to my mind anymore. Maybe nostalgia has overlooked what is there, but in either case it still remains one of my favorite JRPGs of the PSone era.
willardhaven
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 12 (100%)
[quote name='MSI Magus']I didnt say people that preffer a certain type of battle are being ojbective. However it is possible to objectivly look at video game quality....hell its what reviewers are supposed to do.
You stating Wild Arms 2 holds up isnt objective.
You stating that CC music is perfect is so unobjective its a joke.
Stating non random battles is better is not objective.
Stuff like a plot hole however is objective. And when you stand back and look at Chrono Cross objectivly it becomes very easy to spot quite a few flaws. I will never change your mind(its rare to change anyones minds on anything). But honestly, when a developer of a game calls it a flawed release and admits it was due to a rushed release. You have already lost any objective creditability. CC was flawed regardless of what you say, its easy to spot.
WA2 was far from perfect, but thats why I named it. Because even though it wasnt a AAA release it came out and was overlooked because it wasnt a big name. However it was still a solid quality title with few objective flaws.....but you wont be able to see this since as your posts in the other RPG topic have shown you tend to only like really weird games that try to overacheive and fall flat on their face like Radiata Stories[/quote]
Every counterpoint you have is subjective.
You legitimately believe Wild ARMs (or half of the PS1 RPGs) aged as well as CC?
Also, name some games from the PS1 era that had better musical direction.
From your fantasy world's objective point of view, non-random battles are better because they do not disturb the player from experiencing the game. Just because you are used to a certain tradition does not make it more objectively sound. Since everything we are arguing is subjective, obviously I am going to make statements that are not objective.
I think random battles are idiotic so of course I will judge a game more harshly for having them. I like Breath of Fire IV and Final Fantasy IV even with random battles, so my subjective opinion still does not rule out quality games. Your sense of objectivity wholly prevents you from appreciating an excellent game such as Chrono Cross, so I don't know whose objective reality you are in.
Games cannot be objectively reviewed, your faith in reviewers and disappointed game creators shows you have to look to others to figure out what is or is not of high quality.
Chrono Cross is rushed and full of flaws, but it plays a lot better than WA 2, you have to be a lobotomy patient not to realize that.
Yes, I do happen to love a few games that flopped commercially. This is only because many of them end up being better than the games which succeed. Though I do really like Persona 3 and Chrono Trigger, which I think are really successful games.
You stating Wild Arms 2 holds up isnt objective.
You stating that CC music is perfect is so unobjective its a joke.
Stating non random battles is better is not objective.
Stuff like a plot hole however is objective. And when you stand back and look at Chrono Cross objectivly it becomes very easy to spot quite a few flaws. I will never change your mind(its rare to change anyones minds on anything). But honestly, when a developer of a game calls it a flawed release and admits it was due to a rushed release. You have already lost any objective creditability. CC was flawed regardless of what you say, its easy to spot.
WA2 was far from perfect, but thats why I named it. Because even though it wasnt a AAA release it came out and was overlooked because it wasnt a big name. However it was still a solid quality title with few objective flaws.....but you wont be able to see this since as your posts in the other RPG topic have shown you tend to only like really weird games that try to overacheive and fall flat on their face like Radiata Stories
[/quote]Every counterpoint you have is subjective.
You legitimately believe Wild ARMs (or half of the PS1 RPGs) aged as well as CC?
Also, name some games from the PS1 era that had better musical direction.
From your fantasy world's objective point of view, non-random battles are better because they do not disturb the player from experiencing the game. Just because you are used to a certain tradition does not make it more objectively sound. Since everything we are arguing is subjective, obviously I am going to make statements that are not objective.
I think random battles are idiotic so of course I will judge a game more harshly for having them. I like Breath of Fire IV and Final Fantasy IV even with random battles, so my subjective opinion still does not rule out quality games. Your sense of objectivity wholly prevents you from appreciating an excellent game such as Chrono Cross, so I don't know whose objective reality you are in.
Games cannot be objectively reviewed, your faith in reviewers and disappointed game creators shows you have to look to others to figure out what is or is not of high quality.
Chrono Cross is rushed and full of flaws, but it plays a lot better than WA 2, you have to be a lobotomy patient not to realize that.
Yes, I do happen to love a few games that flopped commercially. This is only because many of them end up being better than the games which succeed. Though I do really like Persona 3 and Chrono Trigger, which I think are really successful games.
[quote name='willardhaven']Every counterpoint you have is subjective.
You legitimately believe Wild ARMs (or half of the PS1 RPGs) aged as well as CC?
Also, name some games from the PS1 era that had better musical direction.
From your fantasy world's objective point of view, non-random battles are better because they do not disturb the player from experiencing the game. Just because you are used to a certain tradition does not make it more objectively sound. Since everything we are arguing is subjective, obviously I am going to make statements that are not objective.
I think random battles are idiotic so of course I will judge a game more harshly for having them. I like Breath of Fire IV and Final Fantasy IV even with random battles, so my subjective opinion still does not rule out quality games. Your sense of objectivity wholly prevents you from appreciating an excellent game such as Chrono Cross, so I don't know whose objective reality you are in.
Games cannot be objectively reviewed, your faith in reviewers and disappointed game creators shows you have to look to others to figure out what is or is not of high quality.
Chrono Cross is rushed and full of flaws, but it plays a lot better than WA 2, you have to be a lobotomy patient not to realize that.
Yes, I do happen to love a few games that flopped commercially. This is only because many of them end up being better than the games which succeed. Though I do really like Persona 3 and Chrono Trigger, which I think are really successful games.[/QUOTE]
Meh like I said, iv had this debate a million times before and not gonna redue it now. People like you never learn because for the last 20 years people in this nation of learned that their opinion is a precious precious thing that is as good as anyone elses. No one has the abilty to look at things anymore and set aside their own feelings in an attempt to try and see the truth. Say what I had to say is subjective, but really its not. I do the same things to games like Parasite Eve or FFVI that I love. A flaw is a flaw and they are objective.
Dont bother responding....like I said iv had this argument too many times. I know that your opinion wont change.
And a quick PS. I didnt say you loved games that didnt commercially succeed I said you liked bad games just because they innovate(iv been watching your posts for quite some time). I love alot of small titles like Suikoden 2, Tactics Ogre and back in the day Breath of Fire 2, and alot of them are better then big name titles that did do well *cough chrono cross*
You legitimately believe Wild ARMs (or half of the PS1 RPGs) aged as well as CC?
Also, name some games from the PS1 era that had better musical direction.
From your fantasy world's objective point of view, non-random battles are better because they do not disturb the player from experiencing the game. Just because you are used to a certain tradition does not make it more objectively sound. Since everything we are arguing is subjective, obviously I am going to make statements that are not objective.
I think random battles are idiotic so of course I will judge a game more harshly for having them. I like Breath of Fire IV and Final Fantasy IV even with random battles, so my subjective opinion still does not rule out quality games. Your sense of objectivity wholly prevents you from appreciating an excellent game such as Chrono Cross, so I don't know whose objective reality you are in.
Games cannot be objectively reviewed, your faith in reviewers and disappointed game creators shows you have to look to others to figure out what is or is not of high quality.
Chrono Cross is rushed and full of flaws, but it plays a lot better than WA 2, you have to be a lobotomy patient not to realize that.
Yes, I do happen to love a few games that flopped commercially. This is only because many of them end up being better than the games which succeed. Though I do really like Persona 3 and Chrono Trigger, which I think are really successful games.[/QUOTE]
Meh like I said, iv had this debate a million times before and not gonna redue it now. People like you never learn because for the last 20 years people in this nation of learned that their opinion is a precious precious thing that is as good as anyone elses. No one has the abilty to look at things anymore and set aside their own feelings in an attempt to try and see the truth. Say what I had to say is subjective, but really its not. I do the same things to games like Parasite Eve or FFVI that I love. A flaw is a flaw and they are objective.
Dont bother responding....like I said iv had this argument too many times. I know that your opinion wont change.
And a quick PS. I didnt say you loved games that didnt commercially succeed I said you liked bad games just because they innovate(iv been watching your posts for quite some time). I love alot of small titles like Suikoden 2, Tactics Ogre and back in the day Breath of Fire 2, and alot of them are better then big name titles that did do well *cough chrono cross*
willardhaven
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 12 (100%)
[quote name='MSI Magus']Meh like I said, iv had this debate a million times before and not gonna redue it now. People like you never learn because for the last 20 years people in this nation of learned that their opinion is a precious precious thing that is as good as anyone elses. No one has the abilty to look at things anymore and set aside their own feelings in an attempt to try and see the truth. Say what I had to say is subjective, but really its not. I do the same things to games like Parasite Eve or FFVI that I love. A flaw is a flaw and they are objective.
Dont bother responding....like I said iv had this argument too many times. I know that your opinion wont change.
And a quick PS. I didnt say you loved games that didnt commercially succeed I said you liked bad games just because they innovate(iv been watching your posts for quite some time). I love alot of small titles like Suikoden 2, Tactics Ogre and back in the day Breath of Fire 2, and alot of them are better then big name titles that did do well *cough chrono cross*[/quote]
Why would you respond to me if you didn't want me to answer? Kind of rude for you to say that when your responses are barely coherent.
I'm just debating for fun, of course we are going to continue to play the games we like and form our own opinions. Is my opinion going to be the most "precious" to me? Damn straight.
If I talk to a football fan he will tell me to drop Persona and pick up Madden. While I would never do that, I wouldn't claim to be more objective than him. I like new ideas, you (along with the majority of Japanese RPG fans and reviewers) favor tradition, it's as simple as that.
I wouldn't argue with you if your opinion was completely invalid, but you are out of your mind if you think you're being objective.
To stay on topic: is there any information on what exactly will fill up the 2 screens with CT DS?
Dont bother responding....like I said iv had this argument too many times. I know that your opinion wont change.
And a quick PS. I didnt say you loved games that didnt commercially succeed I said you liked bad games just because they innovate(iv been watching your posts for quite some time). I love alot of small titles like Suikoden 2, Tactics Ogre and back in the day Breath of Fire 2, and alot of them are better then big name titles that did do well *cough chrono cross*[/quote]
Why would you respond to me if you didn't want me to answer? Kind of rude for you to say that when your responses are barely coherent.
I'm just debating for fun, of course we are going to continue to play the games we like and form our own opinions. Is my opinion going to be the most "precious" to me? Damn straight.
If I talk to a football fan he will tell me to drop Persona and pick up Madden. While I would never do that, I wouldn't claim to be more objective than him. I like new ideas, you (along with the majority of Japanese RPG fans and reviewers) favor tradition, it's as simple as that.
I wouldn't argue with you if your opinion was completely invalid, but you are out of your mind if you think you're being objective.
To stay on topic: is there any information on what exactly will fill up the 2 screens with CT DS?
[quote name='willardhaven']
To stay on topic: is there any information on what exactly will fill up the 2 screens with CT DS?[/QUOTE]
I remember once - during the heydey of the GBA - that people were asking where more of the SNES ports were. Of course Square's material was brought up (this was before FF1-6 remakes), Chrono Trigger heading the charge. Someone - I'm guessing an IGN member, or one of the other prominent Nintendo sites - said that CT would be difficult to bring over due to the menu system being as large as it is, and the lower/smaller resolution of the GBA wouldn't be able to pull it off.
Hence, my guess is that the bottom screen will be almost entirely devoted to menus and commands while the top displays the battle.
There's a promo video over at the site and some screenshots on the 'net that suggest that both screens will be used at specific times, such as when you first visit Magus's castle, where it does that beautiful pan from the top to the bottom, with a bright full moon standing in the back.
Wants to touch the Chrono Trigger DS.
To stay on topic: is there any information on what exactly will fill up the 2 screens with CT DS?[/QUOTE]
I remember once - during the heydey of the GBA - that people were asking where more of the SNES ports were. Of course Square's material was brought up (this was before FF1-6 remakes), Chrono Trigger heading the charge. Someone - I'm guessing an IGN member, or one of the other prominent Nintendo sites - said that CT would be difficult to bring over due to the menu system being as large as it is, and the lower/smaller resolution of the GBA wouldn't be able to pull it off.
Hence, my guess is that the bottom screen will be almost entirely devoted to menus and commands while the top displays the battle.
There's a promo video over at the site and some screenshots on the 'net that suggest that both screens will be used at specific times, such as when you first visit Magus's castle, where it does that beautiful pan from the top to the bottom, with a bright full moon standing in the back.
Wants to touch the Chrono Trigger DS.
willardhaven
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 12 (100%)
Between this and IV I'll be reliving my childhood on the DS this year.
Reality's Fringe
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 8 (100%)
Chrono Cross was the reason I traded in my PSX for a gamecube.
Yes, I'm completely serious.
Yes, I'm completely serious.
willardhaven
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 12 (100%)
Reality's Fringe;4575713]Chrono Cross was the reason I traded in my PSX for a gamecube. Yes said:
willardhaven
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 12 (100%)
Maybe it's Chrono Trigger Turbo HD Remix as I had hoped for.
I don't really notice a difference, but I haven't played CT in 9 or so years.
I don't really notice a difference, but I haven't played CT in 9 or so years.
CoffeeEdge
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 15 (100%)
The graphics are not redrawn. This is not Chrono Trigger HD Remix. Don't get your hopes up, guys, you'll just be disappointed. :/
[quote name='Vinny']The resolution of the video looks like it's higher than the DS' screen resolution which is why I figured it'd be more pixelated.[/quote]they can render the video to output whatever resolution they want. they're not locked into the ds resolution and having to blow it up.
willardhaven
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 12 (100%)
Seriously, if there is one SNES game that holds up this is it.
willardhaven
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 12 (100%)
Darn whippersnappers.
Seriously, I thought PS1 was so ugly in 1995-1996 because I was playing Chrono Trigger, Mario RPG and Yoshi's Island while my friend had X-Games, Lemmings and Ridge Racer.
Seriously, I thought PS1 was so ugly in 1995-1996 because I was playing Chrono Trigger, Mario RPG and Yoshi's Island while my friend had X-Games, Lemmings and Ridge Racer.
Jesus_S_Preston
CAGiversary!
Ha!
[quote name='willardhaven']Darn whippersnappers.
Seriously, I thought PS1 was so ugly in 1995-1996 because I was playing Chrono Trigger, Mario RPG and Yoshi's Island while my friend had X-Games, Lemmings and Ridge Racer.[/quote]
You and me both. There were some fugly polygons back then.
Seriously, I thought PS1 was so ugly in 1995-1996 because I was playing Chrono Trigger, Mario RPG and Yoshi's Island while my friend had X-Games, Lemmings and Ridge Racer.[/quote]
You and me both. There were some fugly polygons back then.
willardhaven
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 12 (100%)
I think FF VII's pre-rendered backgrounds and battle graphics look fine.
The character models with hooves however, do not hold up well.
The character models with hooves however, do not hold up well.
What are you talking about? Aren't people supposed to have Popeye arms and long flat feet?
Kidding aside, I'm not saying it did not get better, but there was some hideous 3D back then. Kinda happens every generation. There were some stand out PS games that looked better than some muddy looking mediocre PS2 launch games. Art direction is critical. CT's was excellent.
Kidding aside, I'm not saying it did not get better, but there was some hideous 3D back then. Kinda happens every generation. There were some stand out PS games that looked better than some muddy looking mediocre PS2 launch games. Art direction is critical. CT's was excellent.
GTmaster39
CAGiversary!
Now I can stop playing this game on a emulator. This is excellent news. I havent touched my DS in months.....so this game will defiantly keep my attention.
willardhaven
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 12 (100%)
[quote name='Vinny']I thought I was the only one... I don't know why but I get goosebumps too, every time the intro music or the Battle With Magus theme plays.[/quote]
It's Mitsuda, he is a genius.
It's Mitsuda, he is a genius.
Rei no Otaku
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 3 (100%)
[quote name='willardhaven']It's Mitsuda, he is a genius.[/QUOTE]
Not so sure I'd say that. The CT soundtrack is exceptional, but he hasn't done anything close to as good since.
Not so sure I'd say that. The CT soundtrack is exceptional, but he hasn't done anything close to as good since.
bread's done