A biased review: Breath of Fire

[Nem]

RolStoppable said:

 

Nem said:
I never understand the logic in reviewing a classic game with present day standards. It was a different time when this game came out. A time when grinding didnt seem like such a terrible thing because your were playing a marvel of technological software.

The logic is simple: These old day standards don't exist anymore, so these circumstances of playing a game right when it came out cannot be replicated. Writing a review entirely from such a perspective would make the review pretty pointless as a guide for the reader. Although my judgment of the graphics and sound do take the hardware the game originally ran on into account, because not doing that would be nonsensical. But things like gameplay, level design and the like are usually not limited by hardware; they are deliberate decisions by the developers and as such it doesn't matter whether the year is 1994 or 2014.

Now for Breath of Fire specifically, grinding isn't even one of my complaints because there wasn't a single point in the game where I felt that I have to grind to beat a boss. The issue is that you get bombarded with random encounters that barely reward you. I can also give you a mini-review of the game from the perspective of 1994:

Compared to a genre highlight like Secret of Mana, Breath of Fire plays, looks and sounds worse. Whereas Squaresoft's title manages to create a motivating mix of combat, exploration and getting more powerful, Capcom's game wastes way too much time on forcing the player through one random encounter after another. Perhaps the company should stick to pumping out more Mega Man and Street Fighter, because their first foray into the JRPG genre is something that's only suited for people who have caught a serious cold and have to stay in bed all day long, being unable to do anything more taxing than clicking on an auto-battle button. Score: 4.5/10.

The point would be, not to review something 20 years later. It kind of defeats the purpose to review something that wasnt designed for this age.

I dont know what is so wrong with people looking fondly at something with nostalgia that another one feels the need to shoot it down. Their nostalgia is correct because it was born when the game was released and not 20 years later.

I imagine something like The last of us will be terrible in 20 years. Whats the point? That new things are more modern than old things?! Well... doh. :P