By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - IGN gives Lightning Returns a 7.0

Zax said:

In comparison XIII got a 8.9 and XIII got an 8.0 so not really that great a score. For some reason according to metacritic a 7/10 counts as a mixed review? That's kinda stupid if it were a film they'd be a good review.

Inflation.  99.9% of games get a 6/10 or higher.  6/10 is considered bad, 7/10 is considered average.  They'll very rarely give a game lower than a 6/10, but it happens.

You should check out my reviews.  1-3 bad,  4-5 below average, 5.5 average, 6-10 good to excellent. 

 

Around the Network

A 7 in general is not a bad score.

A big Final Fantasy game scoring a 7 is disappointing.

Well, that is that for the XIII saga.

Motomu Toryama has already set his eyes on a new game to ruin, Final Fantasy X-3 will be next.



well, all reviewers seems to agreed with the gameplay department so i guess it will be fun to play.



65 on metacritic. Amazing how this series has fallen.



Hopefully FFXVI will bring the series back to the roots. I did not buy any title after FFXII (which I'm enjoying in HD on emulator right now for the very first time, although I bought it back in the day but never really played it) and found the FFXIV ARR beta to be a horrible WoW clone with stupid quests and unworthy of carrying the name Final Fantasy.

I also strongly dislike Kingdom Harts because I hate mindless button mashing action games so I will not buy FFXV either.



Around the Network

So they gave the other games 8.9 and 8.0 and this one a 7... well if this game is anything to go by its even worse then the old ones beauce fo me they are worst games I've ever played



If it isn't turnbased it isn't worth playing   (mostly)

And shepherds we shall be,

For Thee, my Lord, for Thee. Power hath descended forth from Thy hand, That our feet may swiftly carry out Thy command. So we shall flow a river forth to Thee And teeming with souls shall it ever be. In Nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritūs Sancti. -----The Boondock Saints

etking said:
Hopefully FFXVI will bring the series back to the roots. I did not buy any title after FFXII (which I'm enjoying in HD on emulator right now for the very first time, although I bought it back in the day but never really played it) and found the FFXIV ARR beta to be a horrible WoW clone with stupid quests and unworthy of carrying the name Final Fantasy.

I also strongly dislike Kingdom Harts because I hate mindless button mashing action games so I will not buy FFXV either.

I actually thought Kingdom Hearts 1 was a great game. Great story, great gameplay (no not perfect), great characters. I personally don't consider KH1 a mindless button basher.

KH2 I didn't actually finish, but I believe there were more button bashing involved in it. Unfortunately I think the problem with KH and FF13 is this idiotic idea that battles have to be real time enounters. Meaning you only have the option of controlling one character at a time, meaning the AI controls the 2 supporting characters.

I think this Square Enix's problem, they want spectacle and stunning battle visuals, yet that has removed the player from the gameplay decisisons. Resulting in an automatic process where AI fights AI, rather than having manual control.

Personally I think thats where this series is going wrong gameplay wise. I'm not saying we need a return to turn based battles, but I want to see the player control 3 players in real time, meaning less emphasis on fast battles that focus on spectale and animation, but slower battles that give the user enough time to input commands giving way to more manually controllable gameplay options that offer more tactical depth.

In a nutshell I think the problem is AI controlled characters during battles, which has reduced overall gameplay depth.



A203D said:
I think this Square Enix's problem, they want spectacle and stunning battle visuals, yet that has removed the player from the gameplay decisisons. Resulting in an automatic process where AI fights AI, rather than having manual control.

Personally I think thats where this series is going wrong gameplay wise. I'm not saying we need a return to turn based battles, but I want to see the player control 3 players in real time, meaning less emphasis on fast battles that focus on spectale and animation, but slower battles that give the user enough time to input commands giving way to more manually controllable gameplay options that offer more tactical depth.

In a nutshell I think the problem is AI controlled characters during battles, which has reduced overall gameplay depth.

Yes and no. I certainly think you're at least half-way right.

The problem with S-E is that game design has two steps, design and execution. To make a good game, you first DESIGN the game to be fair, but exceedingly difficult, and then you use your EXECUTION to dial that back to the desired difficulty. The key is, though, that you start with smart design.

For the record, From Soft does this wonderfully with the Souls series. The enemies there are designed to have attacks and combinations which could simply obliterate very high level player if they were used correctly, but because they telegraph their use and they don't always use them at the right time the games are tough, but fair.

Square Enix refuses to do this. They clearly wanted XIII's combat to look fast and energetic, but it goes by too fast to meaningfully make decisions and enter commands (Like you said: spectacle). Instead they made a collection of "obvious when you use these" paradigms against enemies which are dumber (and tougher) than posts. Two dumbs don't make a smart.

Paradigmed combat could have been phenomenal if opponents fought back with their own paradigms rather than monstrous HP bars. Slow combat doesn't mean you can't have Lightning doing fancy flip strikes, but it does mean she has to look winded afterwards to give the player time to think through using the paradigm deck for bluffs and feints.

I can see why some players would be upset by the indirect control, but personally I was fine with it. It's basically delegating tedious parts of combat to a friendly AI, and I'm all for that.



Egann said:
A203D said:
I think this Square Enix's problem, they want spectacle and stunning battle visuals, yet that has removed the player from the gameplay decisisons. Resulting in an automatic process where AI fights AI, rather than having manual control.

Personally I think thats where this series is going wrong gameplay wise. I'm not saying we need a return to turn based battles, but I want to see the player control 3 players in real time, meaning less emphasis on fast battles that focus on spectale and animation, but slower battles that give the user enough time to input commands giving way to more manually controllable gameplay options that offer more tactical depth.

In a nutshell I think the problem is AI controlled characters during battles, which has reduced overall gameplay depth.

Yes and no. I certainly think you're at least half-way right.

The problem with S-E is that game design has two steps, design and execution. To make a good game, you first DESIGN the game to be fair, but exceedingly difficult, and then you use your EXECUTION to dial that back to the desired difficulty. The key is, though, that you start with smart design.

For the record, From Soft does this wonderfully with the Souls series. The enemies there are designed to have attacks and combinations which could simply obliterate very high level player if they were used correctly, but because they telegraph their use and they don't always use them at the right time the games are tough, but fair.

Square Enix refuses to do this. They clearly wanted XIII's combat to look fast and energetic, but it goes by too fast to meaningfully make decisions and enter commands (Like you said: spectacle). Instead they made a collection of "obvious when you use these" paradigms against enemies which are dumber (and tougher) than posts. Two dumbs don't make a smart.

Paradigmed combat could have been phenomenal if opponents fought back with their own paradigms rather than monstrous HP bars. Slow combat doesn't mean you can't have Lightning doing fancy flip strikes, but it does mean she has to look winded afterwards to give the player time to think through using the paradigm deck for bluffs and feints.

I can see why some players would be upset by the indirect control, but personally I was fine with it. It's basically delegating tedious parts of combat to a friendly AI, and I'm all for that.

IMHO Persona does combat way better than 13 ever did.



Soriku said:


Excellent.