So You Think You Can Ride RPG Thread XIV's Chocobo!!!?

Status
Not open for further replies.
[quote name='GhostShark']Play it, love it and love Jack and Grunt. That is you need to do to enjoy the game :applause:[/QUOTE]

Truth, but with a little Garrus mixed in.
 
[quote name='GhostShark']Play it, love it and love Jack and Grunt. That is you need to do to enjoy the game :applause:[/QUOTE]

[quote name='momouchi']Truth, but with a little Garrus mixed in.[/QUOTE]
Don't forget Tali!
 
I don't understand the love for Garrus. He's a playable character yet again in ME3, but I find him one of the most boring. I never used him except for his own specific missions in ME2, and I forced myself to use him in one of my ME1 playthroughs as a main party member, but I don't really care for him.

ME1: Wrex and Tali (Wrex is so awesome I named my DA:O dog after him)
ME2: Mordin and Tali
Tali better as fuck be back in ME3 (haven't heard either way), as she's my love interest from ME2 and I wanna see her face dammit!
 
Infinite Undiscovery is done. Finished in 40 hours but I did every crappy side quest.

Positives:

Battle system -- easy to use and gets the job done. Not as flashy as Eternal Sonata. I wish there was a setting between use zero MP and start dropping your most powerful spells and abilities on creatures that die pretty quickly.

Item creation -- Great way to make money and get powerful items early. Make sure you download the free voucher on XBL to make every vendor sell every base component in the game.

Neutrals:

Story -- Very cliche but my daughter loves these kinds of stories so I bumped it up. There is absolutely nothing that happens that you can't predict ahead of time.

Negatives:

Party management -- There are 17 members of your party by the end of the game. What's even worse is that there are times when you have to pick three teams of four and equip all of them. There are also times when other members of your party join in the fray so you always need to make sure everyone has something equipped. By the end of the game, I was completely done with that mess and settled on a main party and the rest of the guys were slightly under-leveled. Fortunately, it didn't matter.

Overall, I liked the game. It was thoroughly average in every way but that's not a bad thing. I won't be doing the Seraphic Gate or any other New Game+ quests but I had a good time with my playthrough and would recommend the game if you've already played Lost Odyssey, Eternal Sonata, Blue Dragon, and FFXIII.
 
finally got off my ass and decided to finish dq6. until...

"i'll explore the last world as soon as i unlock hero."
*masters paladin*
"where's hero?"
[in order to unlock hero, you need to master battlemaster/sage/luminary/ranger]
"fuck!"
 
[quote name='Zmonkay']I don't understand the love for Garrus. He's a playable character yet again in ME3, but I find him one of the most boring. I never used him except for his own specific missions in ME2, and I forced myself to use him in one of my ME1 playthroughs as a main party member, but I don't really care for him.

ME1: Wrex and Tali (Wrex is so awesome I named my DA:O dog after him)
ME2: Mordin and Tali
Tali better as fuck be back in ME3 (haven't heard either way), as she's my love interest from ME2 and I wanna see her face dammit![/QUOTE]
I like Garrus. In ME1 he was pretty boring, but in ME2 he came into his own. I quite enjoyed his quest for revenge in his loyalty mission.

Tali has been confirmed for ME3. They released screenshots of her in your squad.
 
Tali was freaking awesome! ME2 really was a great game. The only thing I hated was how impossible the Vanguard class was on the hardest difficulty when
You have to hold back waves of enemies on the Collector's Ship.
:bomb:
 
Yeah, I was Liara-and-Grunt/Garrus in ME1 and Garrus-and-whoever in ME2. Definitely love mah Garrus. Never cared for Jack, though. You look ridiculous, Jack. Put a shirt on.

Though I actually didn't care for Garrus' loyalty mission. It seemed like there was a disconnect between the writers, the voice actors, and the animators at certain points.
 
ty crotch ill get back into torment soon here, had the crowbar just never thought to equip it. i rolled with max intelligence, wisdom, and threw the rest in charisma.
 
Good man. That's a mage spec, and I personally prefer warrior - a really high constitution can give The Nameless One absurd health regen - but there's a lot of really cool mage-specific shit in the game, too.
 
So I cracked open Tales of Symphonia, mainly because earlier most people said I should start the tales series with this installment. At this point the only thought I have of the game, other than the battle system is brilliant, is why the hell do all of the guards hold their arms up randomly and the whips stop mid hit, and then it hit me, Namco made a lego inspired RPG.

Edit - On a side note though the Zelda series is not an RPG pre se, although I would say as a strict definition it is, has some of the most bad ass music to ever grace the score sheet in recent history.

But on a further more esoteric note, where does role-play end and action adventure begin? I mean in Zelda you never hit exp points, but you never make unique person centric decisions ala fallout/elder scrolls. So where is the line.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think it is kind of a spectrum of role-playing. For example in Elder Scrolls/Fallout, you as the player choose mostly how the character would act in a given situation. You create their personality and experiences and then handle events based on that role. For games like the Tales series, you are playing a role in the sense that you are guiding a set character through their life. The player is witnessing how that character acts in events and are their more like a guardian than a creator.
 
I've always associated the RPG genre with games that involve stat based character progression. As in, killing things will make me stronger via points, manually spent or not. Decision trees aren't a necessary part of that, it's more about your character(s) having a sheet of stats and attributes that make him who he is.

Many games can have elements you see in many RPGs, but I think most people will say a game like God of War isn't one. It has points you gather from kills that you spend on new moves, but it is a game designed completely around the seamless execution of moves from the player's controller. Is it action or adventure? Well it's paced around levels, so there's not much adventure to it in the sense of exploration. It's arcade like. Whereas Assassin's Creed is adventure, or action/adventure, or sandbox, or whatever. Some would call it a platformer because they are obsessed with that one element of the game, and I don't agree with arguments like that.

Zelda to me is adventure; it's about puzzles and solving areas with tools you find along the way. You do not get stronger until a story event takes place in which you get a new sword, become older, etc... The "but you play the role of Link" argument can be used for any game ever made. Yes there are health potions, equipment shops, and things shield durability (reminds you of an RPG), yes there are tons of vines to swing from and leaps to make (platformer), yes there are blocks to move around (puzzle),and we all know there are things to swing a sword at (action). But I think anyone can easily take a reasonably step back and conclude that, "hey, the concept of this game is an adventure."

That's just my take, I'm not very militant on the subject though -- label a game whatever you wish.
 
[quote name='panzerfaust']Zelda to me is adventure; it's about puzzles and solving areas with tools you find along the way. You do not get stronger until a story event takes place in which you get a new sword, older, etc... The "but you play the role of Link" argument can be used for any game ever made. Yes there are health potions, equipment shops, and things shield durability (reminds you of an RPG), yes there are tons of vines to swing from and leaps to make (platformer), yes there are blocks to move around (puzzle),and we all know there are things to swing a sword at (action). But I think anyone can easily take a reasonably step back and conclude that, "hey, the concept of this game is an adventure."

That's just my take, I'm not very militant on the subject though -- label a game whatever you wish.[/QUOTE]

You can get through a Zelda game without ever increasing your health/stats. That doesn't happen in "RPGs". Likewise, I don't consider Zelda an RPG.
 
[quote name='panzerfaust']I've always associated the RPG genre with games that involve stat based character progression. As in, killing things will make me stronger via points, manually spent or not. Decision trees aren't a necessary part of that, it's more about your character(s) having a sheet of stats and attributes that make him who he is.[/QUOTE]
i agree with this. i think it's more about statistics and attributes. the focus is not on reflex (you can add *some*) or personal skill but on manipulating equipment/choosing skills and magic, etc.

unfortunately it has nothing to do with any of the RP in RPG, but that's just how i've always seen it.





i think i'm going to open a huge can of worms by saying ME2 was a tad overrated
 
[quote name='elessar123']You can get through a Zelda game without ever increasing your health/stats. That doesn't happen in "RPGs". Likewise, I don't consider Zelda an RPG.[/QUOTE]

Well you could get through FFVIII without gaining a single level.
 
[quote name='62t']Well you could get through FFVIII without gaining a single level.[/QUOTE]

Same with Vagrant Story,you gained your stats and spells from items.
 
[quote name='62t']Well you could get through FFVIII without gaining a single level.[/QUOTE]

I don't really count FFVIII, because you can't expect to do so without following a guide to the T. On top of that, it exploits cases where you get 0 xp from fights, and your massive amount of playable characters.

Vagrant Story counts, I suppose. Don't know how possible it is to not gain a single stat and still finish the game. If it's zero, then you're still gaining stats.
 
My two cents:

An RPG has two characteristics:

1. Storytelling, especially storytelling in which the player has a say over the outcome, is emphasized as much or moreso than gameplay.

2. Gameplay success is not fully determined by reflexes and direct action but is at least partially abstracted behind a layer of menu selection and stat manipulation.

Of course you could come up with any number of exceptions and caveats. Like pornography, it's impossible to come up with a single airtight definition, but you know it when you see it.
 
[quote name='elessar123']I don't really count FFVIII, because you can't expect to do so without following a guide to the T. On top of that, it exploits cases where you get 0 xp from fights, and your massive amount of playable characters.

Vagrant Story counts, I suppose. Don't know how possible it is to not gain a single stat and still finish the game. If it's zero, then you're still gaining stats.[/QUOTE]

When you beat a boss,its spins a roulette that will give you +1 to any stat,or plus 3 hp,but it's not a big help really.The game is really based more around weapon stats than character ones.
 
[quote name='kainzero']
i think i'm going to open a huge can of worms by saying ME2 was a tad overrated[/QUOTE]

I think it's hands down one of the best games this gen, but it of course doesn't deserve some of the levels of praise it has received. I'm sure everyone could go into their own personal gripes, and if I had to name my #1 it would be a few of the characters missing their mark in a big way. The game is all character interaction, practically no plot -- so when I recruit a few crew members that aren't so interesting to pursue as personalities, it's a much more noticeable flaw.

Jacob was another lifeless shell of a human character like Kaiden and Ashley were, and Jack was the most uninspired device I've seen Bioware implement in a game. I think those are flat out bad characters, a couple others didn't interest me so much but that's more debatable.

Recruiting them was awesome though, that's really why the game is great. It's cinematic, the gunplay feels powerful, the skills are fun to use, and the dialogue scenarios are hilarious.

[quote name='themaster20000']When you beat a boss,its spins a roulette that will give you +1 to any stat,or plus 3 hp,but it's not a big help really.The game is really based more around weapon stats than character ones.[/QUOTE]

I think you're looking way too deeply into that. Even if character stats were non-existent in the game, it's easy to see how the equipment take its place with the same concept.
 
[quote name='themaster20000']Same with Vagrant Story,you gained your stats and spells from items.[/QUOTE]
FF Crystal Chronicles is similar. There's no levels, and stats are raised through equipment and by gathering special relics.

Chrono Cross didn't have a traditional leveling system, though it sort of felt like one.

I sort of agree that Zelda isn't an RPG, but at the same time, it shares some similarities to the genre. Then again, so does Metroid and Castlevania...
 
After spending some time with Mass Effect 2, I think I can say that I like the first more, I really enjoyed the planet exploration in the first but I certainly don't miss always having a full inventory, that's for sure!
 
[quote name='blueshinra']Chrono Cross didn't have a traditional leveling system, though it sort of felt like one.[/QUOTE]

I forgot exactlly how the level system worked but from what I remember it was designed so grinding was useless. I think you gained levels by beating bosses. Again I could be wrong but I remeber reading that you could go through the entire game avoiding minor enimes and never be underleveled.
 
[quote name='Rodimus']I forgot exactlly how the level system worked but from what I remember it was designed so grinding was useless. I think you gained levels by beating bosses. Again I could be wrong but I remeber reading that you could go through the entire game avoiding minor enimes and never be underleveled.[/QUOTE]

Yeah you got your level ups from bosses,and your stats would randomly raise after some battles.
 
Played the FF XIII-2 demo a few nights ago. Was underwhelmed. Never played FF XIII so the combat system was new to me.
Didnt like it. Don't like controlling only one character. Don't like one-click no choice active battle. Don't really like all the damage numbers flying by so quickly that I can't evaluate the effectiveness of each attack.

It looked pretty, but nothing more than just a HD version of FF X. (Which was the last one I finished)
 
Panzer, are you using the various recommended mods/fixes/restored content/purple monkey dishwashers for Planescape?
[quote name='kainzero']i think i'm going to open a huge can of worms by saying ME2 was a tad overrated[/QUOTE]
Panzer pretty much nailed the response to this (though I thought Ashley was a fine character; she did a fine job of making me hate her). And it's a terrible, terrible sign for the game's plot when your position at the very end of the game is nearly identical to your position at the beginning of the game.
 
i think that character-wise and choice-wise, ME2 was great. the general plot didn't really move but it did make you feel like you were a part of the game. the individual plot threads were all good too.

however, gameplay wise it was sorely lacking. the wannabe Gears with random RPG elements was terrible.
also planet scanning was awful.

---

i wouldn't put levels/exp as a condition for an RPG. especially when you consider games like SaGa with no true leveling system.
ff8 has no reflex based gameplay. battles are not won by how well you time your gunblade.

games like crisis core are really iffy on where they fit in though, though i think there is more of a bias towards equipment/stats than action which is why i would loosely term it an action RPG.
 
I would define a RPG as having some sort of dice roll for pretty much everything. Attacks don't do the same amount of damage every time because the console/computer is making the dice roll for you. The computer makes a saving roll every time you're exposed to poison or something else.

Experience is not a must but we can all agree that it plays a huge part in the perception of the genre.
 
[quote name='depascal22']I would define a RPG as having some sort of dice roll for pretty much everything. Attacks don't do the same amount of damage every time because the console/computer is making the dice roll for you. The computer makes a saving roll every time you're exposed to poison or something else.

Experience is not a must but we can all agree that it plays a huge part in the perception of the genre.[/QUOTE]
Intriguing definition.

Does that make Civilization an RPG?
 
Dice rolling?

Marioparty_boxart.jpg
 
[quote name='The Crotch']Intriguing definition.

Does that make Civilization an RPG?[/QUOTE]
only when the battleship loses to the spearman.
 
[quote name='depascal22']I would define a RPG as having some sort of dice roll for pretty much everything. Attacks don't do the same amount of damage every time because the console/computer is making the dice roll for you. The computer makes a saving roll every time you're exposed to poison or something else.

Experience is not a must but we can all agree that it plays a huge part in the perception of the genre.[/QUOTE]
But then even then MGS 3 had these things as well. Various weapons do various amounts of damage per second that is a long a defined number based upon weapon and hit location. There are multiple saving rolls for when ones bones will break, and there are saving roles for exposure from camouflage based on chance/distance/camo rating. Under the hood, and through player interaction you are influencing both but the computer is rolling for you in the background constantly.

Wow, there was a lot better reception to this question that I thought. :)
 
So I tried Neptunia last night.

I thought that because it's similar to Trinity Universe, I'd think it was ok.

It's actually more like, let's identify the worst parts of TriUni. Let's not make it better, but worse. Parts that were slow? Make it slower! Parts that should be removed? Triple the amount! Parts that made it fun? Remove them!

I'm going to give it some more time, but my outlooks aren't so good.
 
Good ways into XIII-2, the opening sequences were pretty sweet ("Come and die" -- Lightning :cool:). Good cutscenes for the most part, though kind of getting annoyed by the solemn monologues from Serah and Lightning that keep popping up. Noel is great, which was the last character I was expecting to like in this game.

You can really tell why this game took so much less time to develop compared XIII. The framerate is frustratingly low in places, and the environments aren't nearly as fancy looking as XIII's were, amongst other aspects that make the game feel less polished. The OST has been alright so far, already heard a few repeats from the original which are both welcome but kind of lame at the same time.

Battles are more demanding in the early game now, and the crystarium feels much more rewarding. Pokemon are the shit.
 
Should be getting my copy of XIII-2 in the mail soon. Hopefully enjoy it better than my crushing disappointment in SCV right now :(
 
[quote name='panzerfaust']You can really tell why this game took so much less time to develop compared XIII. The framerate is frustratingly low in places, and the environments aren't nearly as fancy looking as XIII's were, amongst other aspects that make the game feel less polished.[/QUOTE]
I noticed the frame rate taking big dives during the intro Lightning fight, but the game proper has been silky smooth, and I'm playing on 360 where it's supposed to be the worst. Maybe I've just been lucky.
 
I'll backtrack on what I said there now that I'm out of the bad areas (Sunleth with all the foliage, and the places with weather effects). Battles and other environments are indeed fine.

Already feels like end-game XIII with the battle system =]
 
[quote name='elessar123']So I tried Neptunia last night.

I thought that because it's similar to Trinity Universe, I'd think it was ok.

It's actually more like, let's identify the worst parts of TriUni. Let's not make it better, but worse. Parts that were slow? Make it slower! Parts that should be removed? Triple the amount! Parts that made it fun? Remove them!

I'm going to give it some more time, but my outlooks aren't so good.[/QUOTE]

Yeah. I rented both of those from gamefly a month ago, and couldnt stomach either of them.

The button press-combo combat was WAY too slow. (XX Triangle. X O X). I mean, Xenogears had faster combat than this when it did this style over 10 years ago.
 
[quote name='The Crotch']Bad XIII-2! You are not Planescape Torment! You do not have the same depth of writing and intriguing characters![/QUOTE]
i had a dream that i pirated baldur's gate and baldur's gate 2 and loved them.

they were probably based off of that one time in college when i borrowed my friend's icewind dale 2, installed it and wondered what was going on, then deleted it after 10 minutes.

i don't know what this has to do with anything.
 
[quote name='kainzero']i had a dream that i pirated baldur's gate and baldur's gate 2 and loved them.[/QUOTE]
My RPG-themed dreams tend to involve Yuna cosplay.
 
[quote name='The Crotch']...

That's dumber than the dream I had about hollowing out semi-rotten logs to fashion crude pants for myself.[/QUOTE]

17653.gif
"ur doin it wrong"
 
[quote name='Rodimus']I'm waiting for SCV to come. What's disappointing about it? Reviews have been okay, not great.[/QUOTE]

Gameplay is freaking fantastic. It's fast and fluid, and feels more like SCII than the slow mess than was SCIV.

Game proper, on the other hand, is utter garbage. Most arcade games have more single player content than this fucking piece of trash. I don't play online, and have always loved SC because there was always sooooo much to do. The god damned arcade mode doesn't even have character specific endings for shit's sake. The last fighter I can remember without that was MVC2, but at least it had the character shop to keep you playing. This has nothing in terms of incentive. There aren't even character profiles to view, so I don't give to shits about the new characters. I'm so conflicted, because it plays great but is a really poorly made, rushed game.

On an RPG related note: My XIII-2 came today, but the damned guide shipped separately, so now idk if I'll start tonight (prolly) and just hope the guide wouldn't be helpful in the early areas anyway, or wait till tomorrow. Mainly got the guide for missables, but from what I can tell after the game you can essentially reset the areas so there are no true missables.
 
[quote name='The Crotch']Bad XIII-2! You are not Planescape Torment! You do not have the same depth of writing and intriguing characters![/QUOTE]

Sorry Crotch, I'll be done with it soon :joystick:
--

I don't know what the hell I did, but either my party is stupidly over powered, or the game just entered an 8 hour lull in difficulty. I assume I'm the farthest in so I'll ask for other's experiences on this later. But damn, XIII was much harder in comparison.
 
I don't know, I'm only like 4-5 hours in, but I'm not really feeling the "this game is incredibly easy" vibe that everyone else seems to be. Maybe because I'm still using the Zwerg Scandroid as my Ravager, he's starting to get pretty weak compared to the enemies but I have yet to recruit a better RAV.

The boss fight right before you meet
Hope
was pretty darn hard for me, I barely scraped by and I'm not sure what I could have done better apart from just being higher leveled.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
bread's done
Back
Top