darkknightkryta said:
I'm not going to knock anyone for not liking Chrono Cross, but I personally loved the game. It's one of the better games I've played since Kingdom Hearts 2 and to be frank I'm glad I played it to remind me what JRPGs used to be about. My biggest problem is that the game's ending was rushed and never finished. And I don't know why people can't admit to it being a sequel to Chrono Trigger. Schala was in it. Lavos was the end boss, who happened to have been merged with Schala'. The dragon's were direct decendants of the Reptile species. The future destroyed by Lavos is in the game; it's a playable part. Lucca raised Schala. Chrono and Marle were in the game. I don't even know how you people can not call it a sequel. But I can understand some people not liking it's story as it's a bit convoluted and I had to read up on some things; but the gameplay was solid. |
Actually... just found this:
3. It is getting to the point where RPG games are beginning to resemble each other way too much. Do you think it is getting harder to be innovative when developing a game for this genre? What steps do you take to ensure that you're not just rehashing the same thing over and over?
To say the least, the titles we've worked on have been innovative, and I would like to continue this trend for our future projects. When creating a series, one method is to carry over a basic system, improving upon it as the series progresses, but our stance has been to create a completely new and different world from the ground up, and to restructure the former style. Therefore, Chrono Cross is not a sequel to Chrono Trigger. Had it been, it would have been called "Chrono Trigger 2." Our main objective for Chrono Cross was to share a little bit of the Chrono Trigger worldview, while creating a completely different game as a means of providing new entertainment to the player. This is mainly due to the transition in platform generation from the SNES to the PS. The method I mentioned above, about improving upon a basic system, has inefficiencies, in that it's impossible to maximize the console's performance as the console continues to make improvements in leaps and bounds. Although essentially an RPG, at its core, it is a computer game, and I believe that games should be expressed with a close connection to the console's performance. Therefore, in regards to game development, our goal has always been to "express the game utilizing the maximum performance of the console at that time." I strongly believe that anything created in this way will continue to be innovative
4. With Chrono Trigger (for SNES) considered a classic by many RPG players, was there a concern that not many references to the original are present in Chrono Cross? Were you concerned that you might alienate loyal fans of the original?
As I mentioned before, Chrono Cross is not a sequel to Chrono Trigger, so I'm not worried. Of course, the fans of the original are very important, but what innovation can come about when you're bound to the past? I believe that gameplay should evolve with the hardware. On a different note, the original scenario writer for Chrono Trigger, Masato Kato, worked on Chrono Cross's scenario as well, but actually, there's another game he worked on, called "Radical Dreamers," which was released between Chrono Trigger and Chrono Cross. This was an adventure game released on the Super Famicom online gaming system called the Satellaview. Radical Dreamers served as the bridge between Chrono Trigger and Chrono Cross. Gamers who have played all three games can probably figure out the connection, but since the media itself was so unique, I don't think many players know about it. As a result, we had to make sure players could play Chrono Cross without being too conscious of its connection to Chrono Trigger. This is why we have the title "Chrono Cross" instead of "Chrono Trigger 2."
Source: http://totalplaystation.com/ps2/final-fantasy-xii/news/1045/
