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

Forums - Gaming - Yep after seeing my friends Steam summer sale account, I am switching to PC next gen for sure.

Michael-5 said:
Slimebeast said:
Michael-5 said:
Slimebeast said:
 

I don't know. Yes, PC games are dirty cheap but for me Trophies have made so that I must play everything on the PS3. For example, I really like to play through all the Halo games but since they don't have Trophies I won't bother. Now that's the X360 but it's the same with the PC exclusives I am interested in, like Heroes of M&M 6 and Witcher 2.

Btw, why do you describe yourself as a newbie to PC gaming CGI, when you have mentioned playing through a few PC exclusives such as S.T.A.L.K.E.R. through the years?

I used to be the same way, but in favor of 360 achievements instead of PS3 trophies. However now I don't give a shit. Gears of War 3 has 2,000 achievements, why is the reward for "completing" this game with twice as much as a regular game? I don't care about points now, but I try to get 1,000/1,000 or a platnium trophy on all my favorite JRPG's, or niche games in general.

Why don't you give a shit anymore? Haven't you dreamed of becoming a Trophy God or a Gamerscore God?

I only care for individual games, and not as a cumulative score, and it's more the niche games. More and more games are making trophy's/achievements for playing the game x amount of hours and getting to x level. It's stupid, it's just a way to make you play the games more then you originally intended to (online multiplayer for shooters, multiple playthrough for single player games, quests for RPG's).

Some of the best single player experiences I had were on the Wii/DS/PSP because, I don't use a guide for RPG's, I'm not forced to play online either more then I want, or in specific game modes, and when I'm done I'm done.

Also, specifically for 360, I hate the direction achievements are heading. Why are the DLC (all multiplayer) worth as much as the main game in Gears of War 3? Why is Gears 3 worth nearly twice as much as Gears 1? Why is it easier to get achievements now then it used to be? Acheivements are becoming less and less an expression of what games you play, and more and more an expression of which brand you follow.

Yeah it sucks that you have to play the game unnaturally by following guides. I typically have a hard time trying to decide wether I should play "blind" one time and then use a Trophy guide only after a I beat the game, but then the work becomes even harder.

Trophys both enchance but also derail your gaming experience.

But what do you do when you are hooked like I am? I feel like a slave.



Around the Network
BasilZero said:
Michael-5 said:

Realistically....I wouldn't use half the games on either consoles list to argue which system had btter RPG's. Of the 50 odd games per console, I would argue that a good third of them are not worth playing, and probably another 3rd won't be your or my type of game. This is kind of why I ended up with 40 odd RPG's combined for both handhelds.

 I mean FFIV was also released on the GBA, and the quality is almost the same as the PSP version, minus the screen size. Yes you get after years on PSP, but that was originally a Wii-ware expansion was it not? You don't need a PSP for the full FFIV experience.

A. FFIV can be played on other systems in the same was as it's playable on PSP, however wat about Front Mission? It's not one of Square enix's best selling franchises, but I'll tell you t's my favorite franchise from them, and Front Mission DS is the only version of Front Mission which offers both USC an OCU sides of the games main story (Well the Japan only PS1 version also does this, but we don' get that version).

Either way it's a matter of opinion of which system is the RPG system, it's close though, and on a straight number comparision DS has more. Still if we're arguing what ideal system combination gives the complete experience, I think i's fair to say that you should get both a PSP and a DS. PSP for Valkyria Chronicles, Jeanne d'Arc, and some great remakes, DS for Pokemon, Fire Emblem, and for the other great remakes.

No point squabbling, you and I have both systems, just opposite impressions. Any recomendations? I've been hearing a lot about Etrain Odyssey, is it a franchise worth getting into? I only have time to beat about 4-6 JRPG's on the handheld a year and I have about a dozen I still need to work on before I get a 3DS. Just go Breath of Fire 3 for PSP last week, what luck finding it at the local store.

If you haven't had as good of an experience on DS as you had on PSP, I would strongly suggest playing all the bolded games that you missed. I'm really surprised you missed some of those big DS games considering Fire Emblem and Front Mission play a lot like Final Fantasy Tactics (but are better).


Before I post/quote on this post @ moderators - Dont look at this as a argument/spam/offtopic(ok its offtopic but..), it'll be overwhelming to post it on his wall xD.  By no means is this a troll/flame post, its positive.

I'll go by the paragraphs in the above quote.

1st - Eh it depends on taste I believe, I remember playing such a simple looking RPG dungeon crawler on the NDS called "From the Abyss", even though its not as good looking or plays as well as recent RPGs, it was pretty fun and addictive. Same with the PSP games such as Astonishia Story/Legend of Heroes.

2nd - Final Fantasy IV on the GBA and the PSP versions are completely different in terms of graphic style overall, in both animation and in the art.



^ First is from GBA and the second is from PSP.

The animation speed/delay is sped up a bit compared to the GBA/SNES/PSX versions just like the Anniversary editions of FFI & FFII are faster than the PSX and GBA remakes. The PSP version is the same as the GBA version in terms of features (i.e. new dungeon, items, etc), but it also includes the Auto Battle feature in battle which makes it easier to grind.

Yeah screen size doesnt affect me at all, but it is a plus for bigger screen.

3rd - I didnt get into front mission that much, probably because I was too young to understand RPGs that much back than, I remember playing it around the early 2000s for the SNES version. I'll give it a try again! Is the NDS version a remake?

4th - Eterian Odyssey is a pretty good series, I only got to play a little bit of it however, I am planning to play (and possibly record) since the series looks promising enough and is being expanded as the next big RPG of the generation. Also have fun with Breath of Fire 3, its really good :)

Which RPGs have you played/own on the PSP/NDS, is it on your list? I'll recommend some good ones (ones you didnt play but I did).

5th- I did play Jeanne D'Arc, and loved it, I knew I forgot to add a game on the list ;p, I also already had added Legend of Heroes one you mentioned in the list xD.

Pokemon Conquest, I plan to record it around October or November when I get Pokemon White 2 for my YT channel. I never got into the Fire Emblem series, but I will, there's so many games from the series that I have to play ;p

I'll check out the rest of the games you mentioned.

Yea, this is off topic, but..... no one else is allowed to be involved. LOL. It'' a good debate.

1. I agree, 100%. Also I don't think most JRPG gamers are as focused on graphics as other gamers. It's the game that's important. Example, I beat Chrono Trigger in the PS2 era (never played it as a kid), and now it's basicall my favorite RPG, despite the crap graphics for the time.

2. FFIV for PSP is better then GBA, but the core game is really the same. I wouldn't tell people who own a DS/Wii to buy a PSP for FFIV when the GBA version is the same game, minus some polishing. I just wanted to argue that that FFIV experience can be had at near the same quality elsewhere, and it's an example of why ports/remakes should be mentioned on the side when making an RPG and/or exclusive list.

3. The NDS version is a remake of the Japan only SNES Front Mission. It's the first game in the franchise, and what makes the DS version so great is that it includes a 15 hour expansion (USC Story) which wasn't included in the original game. However if you're going to give Front Mission a try, I would recommend starting with Front Mission 4 for PS2. FM1 is a really old game, and it shows. If you're not a fan of strategy RPG's like Final Fantasy Tactics, you won't like this franchise, and the PS2 version is prettier, easier, and has a deeper story (mainly because PS2 is more capale of telling a story then SNES with cutscenes and disk space). The gameplay in FM1 is dated, so you have to really have a taste for classic RPG's to enjoy it.

4. I own most RPG's from Nintendo and Square Enix, including all the Final Fantasy's, Dragon Quests, Pokemon, etc. For DS I also have DBZ, Radiant Historia, Suikoden, Infinite Space, and I'm looking into patches for Tales of Innocence for DS so I can import a copy. For PSP I have all the Square enix games which I am interested in, plus Breath of Fire 3, Star Oceans, Valkyria Chronicles 2 (which I really like), Jeanne D'Ark, Tales of the World, Trails in the Sky, and a few more.

That said, I really hate Monster Hunter, don't really like Disgaea, and I'm not a fan of persona. I love PS1/SNES era RPG's and those which are similar to them, so that's probably why I hate The World Ends With You and Persona. Too modern.

Is Etrain Odyssey one of the RPG's with a random dungeon generator?

5. I strongly recommend Fire Emblem over any other franchise on that list. It's my favorite handheld RPG franchise, and the level of challenge, depth/length of story, amount of content, depth of characters, gameplay and overall design I also find perfect for the handheld. The DS games are not as good as the GBA iterations, but this is still a really good franchise. I'm actually putting off buying a 3DS until they make a special edition Fire Emblem 3DS, so I can buy it. The Wii/GCN versions are alright, but when you play these games on consoles they are kind of underwhelming because the gamecube and Wii are capable of so much more.



What is with all the hate? Don't read GamrReview Articles. Contact me to ADD games to the Database
Vote for the March Most Wanted / February Results

Slimebeast said:
Michael-5 said:
Slimebeast said:

Why don't you give a shit anymore? Haven't you dreamed of becoming a Trophy God or a Gamerscore God?

I only care for individual games, and not as a cumulative score, and it's more the niche games. More and more games are making trophy's/achievements for playing the game x amount of hours and getting to x level. It's stupid, it's just a way to make you play the games more then you originally intended to (online multiplayer for shooters, multiple playthrough for single player games, quests for RPG's).

Some of the best single player experiences I had were on the Wii/DS/PSP because, I don't use a guide for RPG's, I'm not forced to play online either more then I want, or in specific game modes, and when I'm done I'm done.

Also, specifically for 360, I hate the direction achievements are heading. Why are the DLC (all multiplayer) worth as much as the main game in Gears of War 3? Why is Gears 3 worth nearly twice as much as Gears 1? Why is it easier to get achievements now then it used to be? Acheivements are becoming less and less an expression of what games you play, and more and more an expression of which brand you follow.

Yeah it sucks that you have to play the game unnaturally by following guides. I typically have a hard time trying to decide wether I should play "blind" one time and then use a Trophy guide only after a I beat the game, but then the work becomes even harder.

Trophys both enchance but also derail your gaming experience.

But what do you do when you are hooked like I am? I feel like a slave.

Yep, and I honestly think playing a game "blind" is so much better. Guides ruin surprises. However some games, like Catherine, and to an extent FallOut (if you remember to save for the level trophy's), have trophy's/achievements which compliment the game. They encourage you to play the game on the hardest difficulty and beat every side quest and get every ending (not hard in Catherine since you can skip levels on 2nd run throughs when you get a gold rank on them).

What would I do? What I did was be a slave like you, but then I got a Wii and started playing a few games without trophy's, and I dunno. The experience just made me stop caring. Wii doesn't have too many games, but some of them (XenoBlade, Zelda, Metroid Prime, etc) are real gems, worth buying the system just for them. However like I said, for individual games I still go for the platnium.

It's just who cares about the overall score? The people with the most platnium trophy's and gamer points play games like King Kong and Avatar, games which take <5 hours to get a platnium or a "completion" in. What I do is look into each game I get (after buying it), and decide is it worth it to complete? Is it worth getting a high score in? Also people with the most trophies limit themselves to easy PS3 games.

So like for me, games like Gears of War, I'll get 90% of the Gamerpoints for it. However I'm not going to invest a full year of playing the game online every day for that last 10% (yes it's that insane on some 360 exclusives). Same goes for Gran Turismo 5 on PS3. However Alan Wake has a pretty easy set of achievements, and so does InFamous on PS3, and I think the games are good enough for a second playthrough, even if they didn't have trophy's/achievements for it, I'd probably still play it again, so why not max out these games?

I'm still fairly addicted too, I won't play Mass Effect 3 until I get 100% in Mass Effect 2, and I don't want too many 400/1000's or 40% games to tarnish my record.

So what I do is just buy less games, and only get games I think I would enjoy playing enough to get a good score in.

In the rare case you have a game which isn't achievement/trophy frendly, I just try to get more then others lol.

 

So my advice is, moderation, only play games you know you'll get your moneys worth, and while you get your money's worth, you can pick up a few trophy's along the way, and get a Wii, or maybe a DS/PSP and start playing some games without a trophy/achievement system.



What is with all the hate? Don't read GamrReview Articles. Contact me to ADD games to the Database
Vote for the March Most Wanted / February Results

Michael-5 said:
Slimebeast said:
Michael-5 said:
Slimebeast said:
 

Why don't you give a shit anymore? Haven't you dreamed of becoming a Trophy God or a Gamerscore God?

I only care for individual games, and not as a cumulative score, and it's more the niche games. More and more games are making trophy's/achievements for playing the game x amount of hours and getting to x level. It's stupid, it's just a way to make you play the games more then you originally intended to (online multiplayer for shooters, multiple playthrough for single player games, quests for RPG's).

Some of the best single player experiences I had were on the Wii/DS/PSP because, I don't use a guide for RPG's, I'm not forced to play online either more then I want, or in specific game modes, and when I'm done I'm done.

Also, specifically for 360, I hate the direction achievements are heading. Why are the DLC (all multiplayer) worth as much as the main game in Gears of War 3? Why is Gears 3 worth nearly twice as much as Gears 1? Why is it easier to get achievements now then it used to be? Acheivements are becoming less and less an expression of what games you play, and more and more an expression of which brand you follow.

Yeah it sucks that you have to play the game unnaturally by following guides. I typically have a hard time trying to decide wether I should play "blind" one time and then use a Trophy guide only after a I beat the game, but then the work becomes even harder.

Trophys both enchance but also derail your gaming experience.

But what do you do when you are hooked like I am? I feel like a slave.

Yep, and I honestly think playing a game "blind" is so much better. Guides ruin surprises. However some games, like Catherine, and to an extent FallOut (if you remember to save for the level trophy's), have trophy's/achievements which compliment the game. They encourage you to play the game on the hardest difficulty and beat every side quest and get every ending (not hard in Catherine since you can skip levels on 2nd run throughs when you get a gold rank on them).

What would I do? What I did was be a slave like you, but then I got a Wii and started playing a few games without trophy's, and I dunno. The experience just made me stop caring. Wii doesn't have too many games, but some of them (XenoBlade, Zelda, Metroid Prime, etc) are real gems, worth buying the system just for them. However like I said, for individual games I still go for the platnium.

It's just who cares about the overall score? The people with the most platnium trophy's and gamer points play games like King Kong and Avatar, games which take <5 hours to get a platnium or a "completion" in. What I do is look into each game I get (after buying it), and decide is it worth it to complete? Is it worth getting a high score in? Also people with the most trophies limit themselves to easy PS3 games.

So like for me, games like Gears of War, I'll get 90% of the Gamerpoints for it. However I'm not going to invest a full year of playing the game online every day for that last 10% (yes it's that insane on some 360 exclusives). Same goes for Gran Turismo 5 on PS3. However Alan Wake has a pretty easy set of achievements, and so does InFamous on PS3, and I think the games are good enough for a second playthrough, even if they didn't have trophy's/achievements for it, I'd probably still play it again, so why not max out these games?

I'm still fairly addicted too, I won't play Mass Effect 3 until I get 100% in Mass Effect 2, and I don't want too many 400/1000's or 40% games to tarnish my record.

So what I do is just buy less games, and only get games I think I would enjoy playing enough to get a good score in.

In the rare case you have a game which isn't achievement/trophy frendly, I just try to get more then others lol.

 

So my advice is, moderation, only play games you know you'll get your moneys worth, and while you get your money's worth, you can pick up a few trophy's along the way, and get a Wii, or maybe a DS/PSP and start playing some games without a trophy/achievement system.

Great post. Lots of food for thought.

That Gears of war path to get 100% you described is ridiculous. It's just unfair.

It's not just the hunt for Plats but also those 40% games I don't like to have too many of either.

But I wanna be like Kyliedog and badgenome, their Trophy level is like 27 and 23 respectively.

I battle with my Trophy addiction every day lol.



Because I've been pretty much excluded from the final fantasy IV discussion for shameful reasons, for my opinion on the matter see Michael-5's wall.



Around the Network
Slimebeast said:
Michael-5 said:
Slimebeast said:

Yeah it sucks that you have to play the game unnaturally by following guides. I typically have a hard time trying to decide wether I should play "blind" one time and then use a Trophy guide only after a I beat the game, but then the work becomes even harder.

Trophys both enchance but also derail your gaming experience.

But what do you do when you are hooked like I am? I feel like a slave.

Yep, and I honestly think playing a game "blind" is so much better. Guides ruin surprises. However some games, like Catherine, and to an extent FallOut (if you remember to save for the level trophy's), have trophy's/achievements which compliment the game. They encourage you to play the game on the hardest difficulty and beat every side quest and get every ending (not hard in Catherine since you can skip levels on 2nd run throughs when you get a gold rank on them).

What would I do? What I did was be a slave like you, but then I got a Wii and started playing a few games without trophy's, and I dunno. The experience just made me stop caring. Wii doesn't have too many games, but some of them (XenoBlade, Zelda, Metroid Prime, etc) are real gems, worth buying the system just for them. However like I said, for individual games I still go for the platnium.

It's just who cares about the overall score? The people with the most platnium trophy's and gamer points play games like King Kong and Avatar, games which take <5 hours to get a platnium or a "completion" in. What I do is look into each game I get (after buying it), and decide is it worth it to complete? Is it worth getting a high score in? Also people with the most trophies limit themselves to easy PS3 games.

So like for me, games like Gears of War, I'll get 90% of the Gamerpoints for it. However I'm not going to invest a full year of playing the game online every day for that last 10% (yes it's that insane on some 360 exclusives). Same goes for Gran Turismo 5 on PS3. However Alan Wake has a pretty easy set of achievements, and so does InFamous on PS3, and I think the games are good enough for a second playthrough, even if they didn't have trophy's/achievements for it, I'd probably still play it again, so why not max out these games?

I'm still fairly addicted too, I won't play Mass Effect 3 until I get 100% in Mass Effect 2, and I don't want too many 400/1000's or 40% games to tarnish my record.

So what I do is just buy less games, and only get games I think I would enjoy playing enough to get a good score in.

In the rare case you have a game which isn't achievement/trophy frendly, I just try to get more then others lol.

 

So my advice is, moderation, only play games you know you'll get your moneys worth, and while you get your money's worth, you can pick up a few trophy's along the way, and get a Wii, or maybe a DS/PSP and start playing some games without a trophy/achievement system.

Great post. Lots of food for thought.

That Gears of war path to get 100% you described is ridiculous. It's just unfair.

It's not just the hunt for Plats but also those 40% games I don't like to have too many of either.

But I wanna be like Kyliedog and badgenome, their Trophy level is like 27 and 23 respectively.

I battle with my Trophy addiction every day lol.

But who cares? I mean some games just don't reward you as well as others. I mean I only have 42% in Dragon Ball Z: Burst Limit despite it being one of my favorite fighters. However whenever I compare my games to others, I'm always 10% above them or tied. So I'm happy that for one of my favorite games I have a high score.

It doesn't have to be perfect.

As for Kyliedog and badgegome, I guess they have more time to play games. Don' be ashamed that your level is lower then theres, maybe you just have more of a life. That is soemthing to be proud of.

I dunno, just for me it's much easier getting a high score in games I love. That way you feel satisfied once in a while It just sucks for RPG's because you are forced to use a guide, just to get a % which shows you put  lot of effort into the game (even though a lower % could just mean you spent more time, but without a guide).



What is with all the hate? Don't read GamrReview Articles. Contact me to ADD games to the Database
Vote for the March Most Wanted / February Results

BasilZero said:
Michael-5 said:

Yea, this is off topic, but..... no one else is allowed to be involved. LOL. It'' a good debate.

1. I agree, 100%. Also I don't think most JRPG gamers are as focused on graphics as other gamers. It's the game that's important. Example, I beat Chrono Trigger in the PS2 era (never played it as a kid), and now it's basicall my favorite RPG, despite the crap graphics for the time.

2. FFIV for PSP is better then GBA, but the core game is really the same. I wouldn't tell people who own a DS/Wii to buy a PSP for FFIV when the GBA version is the same game, minus some polishing. I just wanted to argue that that FFIV experience can be had at near the same quality elsewhere, and it's an example of why ports/remakes should be mentioned on the side when making an RPG and/or exclusive list.

3. The NDS version is a remake of the Japan only SNES Front Mission. It's the first game in the franchise, and what makes the DS version so great is that it includes a 15 hour expansion (USC Story) which wasn't included in the original game. However if you're going to give Front Mission a try, I would recommend starting with Front Mission 4 for PS2. FM1 is a really old game, and it shows. If you're not a fan of strategy RPG's like Final Fantasy Tactics, you won't like this franchise, and the PS2 version is prettier, easier, and has a deeper story (mainly because PS2 is more capale of telling a story then SNES with cutscenes and disk space). The gameplay in FM1 is dated, so you have to really have a taste for classic RPG's to enjoy it.

4. I own most RPG's from Nintendo and Square Enix, including all the Final Fantasy's, Dragon Quests, Pokemon, etc. For DS I also have DBZ, Radiant Historia, Suikoden, Infinite Space, and I'm looking into patches for Tales of Innocence for DS so I can import a copy. For PSP I have all the Square enix games which I am interested in, plus Breath of Fire 3, Star Oceans, Valkyria Chronicles 2 (which I really like), Jeanne D'Ark, Tales of the World, Trails in the Sky, and a few more.

That said, I really hate Monster Hunter, don't really like Disgaea, and I'm not a fan of persona. I love PS1/SNES era RPG's and those which are similar to them, so that's probably why I hate The World Ends With You and Persona. Too modern.

Is Etrain Odyssey one of the RPG's with a random dungeon generator?

5. I strongly recommend Fire Emblem over any other franchise on that list. It's my favorite handheld RPG franchise, and the level of challenge, depth/length of story, amount of content, depth of characters, gameplay and overall design I also find perfect for the handheld. The DS games are not as good as the GBA iterations, but this is still a really good franchise. I'm actually putting off buying a 3DS until they make a special edition Fire Emblem 3DS, so I can buy it. The Wii/GCN versions are alright, but when you play these games on consoles they are kind of underwhelming because the gamecube and Wii are capable of so much more.


Hehe, not much of a debate when we agree on majority of the things xD! (Besides we've given life to the thread LOL)

1. Heh! I did the same, I played CT around early 2000s, so far from the first time I played it which was back in 2002 or somewhere around it, I must of beaten the game at least 5 times. I also did a playthrough collection on YouTube (with ALL of the endings)

Storyline: http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL4E4B3F0395DBEBEB
Boss Battles: http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL066BA4A526DB62AB

2. Gotta agree with that point, you are right, but I guess that is also why SE decided to add that Prologue and a remake of the After Years, if it was just FFIV, I wouldnt suggest it either unless if they were a huge FF fan like me ;p.

3. I dont mind playing classic retro RPGs as long as the gameplay isnt as badly orchestrated as FFI NES, which I hated xD! I'll give Front Mission a second try, and I do love Strategy RPGs like FFTactics *_*!

4. The games I highly recommend you should try out for each system are:

PSP
-Tales of Eternia (incase you didnt get to play it)
-Brave Story New Traveler (I personally liked it although the storyline might seem a bit weak at first, its a one of a kind rare RPG and the quality in other aspects are pretty good for a RPG of its caliber)
-Lunar Silver Star Harmony (Although you could get other versions of it on the Sega CD, GameBoy Advance and the PSX).
-The YS Series (Ys Seven and Ys The Ark of Naphitsim especially)
-Tactics Ogre Let Us Cling Together (Incase you missed it, another good Strategy RPG)
-Riviera Promised Land (Although you can also get the GBA version)

NDS
-Etrian Odyssey (All 3 NDS games)
-Lufia Curse of the Sinistrals (Although the gameplay is different and I rather recommend you try out the SNES version which is called Lufia Rise of the Sinistrals - NDS Version is like RPG-Action while the SNES was turned based RPG)
-Rhapsody A Musical Adventure (Like Lufia, the NDS version's gameplay is completely different, turned based on NDS, Strategy/RPG for the PSX version).
-Children of Mana (yet another good game incase you didnt get it)
-Luminous Arc (All 3 of them, they are Strategy RPGs)

Oh hey! I hate Monster Hunter as well xD! Yeah not a big fan of modern style RPGs, but over the recent years I have gotten used to them.

5. I'll check it out for sure! I'm also holding out on the 3DS , until they make a new Pokemon game or the remakes of the third gen ;p

1. Yea I think I beat it around the same time as you, and yea I beat it multiple times too.

2. FFIV for PSP is still definatly a game to pick up on PSP, especially for those who haven't played it, I own a copy for PSP lol.

3. Front Mission 1 is fun, and it's a good level of challenging. However, even for me, I have trouble playing the game for more then 3 hours at a time. It's really old school.

4. All those games you recommended, I have looked into, and I own Tactics Ogre. Is Tales of Eternia a lot like Phantasia, because I really didn't like that SNES/GBA iteration. Now that I know PSP is region free (My Breath of Fire 3 is PAL, there is no NTSC version according to Wikipedia) I'll look into it. Never heard of Rhapsody, might get that for PS1 instead.

Children of Mana, lol I still have to play Sword of Mana. I heard the Mana franchise is hit and miss, some great, some not so much.

I've heard a lot about Lufia and Lunar, I think I might like them, but I dunno if I have the time to get to them. I still haven't beaten any of my DS Dragon Quest games, and right now Infinite Space, Pokemon Conquest, Valkyria Chronicles 2, and soon Pokemon B/W 2 take priority, then Breath of Fire 3 and.... by the time I get to these games, 3DS and PSV will have a srong RPG foundation for me to tackle lol. I think I need to make a sacrifice with these and only get them if I find them at a garage sale or the gamestore for dirt cheap.

5. I think you'll like Fire Embelm. Give the GBA games a try first before you judge the franchise, they are the best. Also if you haven't played Golden Sun for GBA (not DS) I strongly reccomend it. It's much, much better.



What is with all the hate? Don't read GamrReview Articles. Contact me to ADD games to the Database
Vote for the March Most Wanted / February Results

BasilZero said:
Michael-5 said:

4. All those games you recommended, I have looked into, and I own Tactics Ogre. Is Tales of Eternia a lot like Phantasia, because I really didn't like that SNES/GBA iteration. Now that I know PSP is region free (My Breath of Fire 3 is PAL, there is no NTSC version according to Wikipedia) I'll look into it. Never heard of Rhapsody, might get that for PS1 instead.

Children of Mana, lol I still have to play Sword of Mana. I heard the Mana franchise is hit and miss, some great, some not so much.

I've heard a lot about Lufia and Lunar, I think I might like them, but I dunno if I have the time to get to them. I still haven't beaten any of my DS Dragon Quest games, and right now Infinite Space, Pokemon Conquest, Valkyria Chronicles 2, and soon Pokemon B/W 2 take priority, then Breath of Fire 3 and.... by the time I get to these games, 3DS and PSV will have a srong RPG foundation for me to tackle lol. I think I need to make a sacrifice with these and only get them if I find them at a garage sale or the gamestore for dirt cheap.

5. I think you'll like Fire Embelm. Give the GBA games a try first before you judge the franchise, they are the best. Also if you haven't played Golden Sun for GBA (not DS) I strongly reccomend it. It's much, much better.

Tales of Eternia's gameplay structure is based upon the old structure of the Tales series (Tales of Phantasia, Tales of Eternia, Tales of Destiny, Tales of Legendia) compared to the new structure (Tales of the Abyss, Tales of Symphonia, Tales of Vesperia, Tales of Graces, etc).

So if you didnt like the old school tales games, you might not enjoy it as much, but its still pretty good, I highly recommend it!

Mana series is overall in general good, the only bad apple in the series was Dawn of Mana for the PS2 (horrible game overall, only good thing about it was the music which was fantastic). I suggest Secret of Mana 2 (Seiken Densetsu 3) for the SNES via emulation since it was never released outside of US and Legend of Mana, the best ones in the series. Children of Mana is pretty good too though, also if you are interested in RTS games, Heroes of Mana is a good game, however RTS isnt really my style of gaming ;p.

I'll check out the Fire Emblem series on the GBA, isnt there a remake of the first one? Shadow Dragon I think it was called maybe. Also yes I have played Golden Sun for the GBA, I loved it so much *-*! I'm planning to record it soon as well!

Legendia is old school? I only played that for a bit, but wow. Yea I probably will pass on it because of that.

How does Sword of Mana compare to those games? I heard great things about Legend of Mana and I though Sword was second best in the franchise. I hear Children is only good, so I've been holding back since I have so many other better JRPG's to beat first. I just might not have time.

However I have heard great things about the Lufia and Lunar franchises. I think I deserve to give them a shot, next time I see a copy I'll pick it up, I often see Lunar for PSP. As for Luifa, since the SNES version will be hard to find (I'll try it on emulation, but if I like it, I'd like to own a copy), what are your opinions on the GBA (Ruins of Lore) and GBC versions? I'd like to play the game as a turn based RPG instead of action.

Luminous Arc looks cool, more anime like then Fire Emblem, but not as polished as a game. I'll look into it, but should I beat FF Tactics for PSP first or?? Where would you rate it in terms of quality compared to other Strategy RPG's?

What's your opinion on Lunar: Dragon Song (Genesis in Europe)?

 

As for Fire Emblem, it's actually an interlinked series. You won't see characters from Fire Emblem games on NES in the Wii version (FE10 - Radiant Dawn), because some games take place hundred of years after others, but you will see characters make appearances through a few games (like Marth is in FE 1-4, Ike is in 9 and 10, etc). Fire Emblem: Shadow Dragon for DS is a remake of FE1, meanwhile Fire Emblem for GBA is FE7 (which is a prequel to FE6 LOL, the games aren't always in chronological order).

FE: Shadow Dragon is good, but not as good as FE7 and FE8 - Sacred Stones (the best in the series IMO) because although they upgraded the graphics, they didn't change the script or gameplay of the game. So it feels dated, with fairly bland characters. However FE7 and FE8 has so much depth to the characters, so much back story.



What is with all the hate? Don't read GamrReview Articles. Contact me to ADD games to the Database
Vote for the March Most Wanted / February Results

BasilZero said:

Sword of Mana is a remake of "Final Fantasy Adventure", its pretty good. Pretty basic gameplay, easy to get into and a decent storyline.

From what I've played I rate these Mana games

Secret of Mana 2 (Seiken Densetsu 3) > Sword of Mana > Secret of Mana > Children of Mana > Dawn of Mana

I havent really played Legend of Mana, but its considered to be far better than Seiken Densetsu 3 which is hard to believe ;p (its from players who played both games as well).

If you get Lufia via Emulation, if you want storyline order, play part 2 first (Rise of the Sinistrals), if you want to play in the order of release, get Lufia Fortress of Doom (I honestly found this to be better than the sequel/prequel due to the overall gameplay). I've played the Ruins of Lore but didnt get into it that much, possibly cause of how the design was on the GBC/GBA, I shall try it again though.

Lunar is absolutely a RPG you should check out!

FFTactics is absolutely one of the best SRPGs ever made, the remake practically owns in quality compared to recent SRPGs especially the Disgaea and the Tactics Advance sequels. If you beaten the original on PSX, I would suggest try out Luminous Arc, otherwise continue to play FFTactics for the PSP.

I didnt get into too much of Lunar Dragon Song/Genesis, looks like a average RPG, but who knows, it may surprise me like "From the Abyss", I'll need to play it again.

@Fire Emblem - Ah understandable ;p, man so many FE games to check out! I guess I'll try out Shadow Dragon!

Also since you love SRPGs, you should try out Shining Force series (on the sega genesis though, there are remakes on other systems). Shining Force 1 remake I believe is on the GBA or NDS, cant remember.

I've only beaten Final Fantasy Tactics Advance for GBA, and I loved it. Played the PS1 version and felt it's of similar quality.

As for Shining Force, I love those games, even the non SRPG iterations.

As for all the other games we've been talking about, I've always considered them, but never really had an opinion to base it off. I guess my To Get list has gotten a whole lot bigger. Ys Seven, and Lunar: Silver Star Harmony are likely the next games I'll buy, but I'll keep everything else in mind.

For now, I have too much to back track on. Infinite Space for DS has be intrigued, just got it recently as well, and Soma Bringer (I have the actual Japanese game and a patched ROM) could surprise me too.



What is with all the hate? Don't read GamrReview Articles. Contact me to ADD games to the Database
Vote for the March Most Wanted / February Results

Michael-5 said:
Slimebeast said:
Michael-5 said:
Slimebeast said:
 

Yeah it sucks that you have to play the game unnaturally by following guides. I typically have a hard time trying to decide wether I should play "blind" one time and then use a Trophy guide only after a I beat the game, but then the work becomes even harder.

Trophys both enchance but also derail your gaming experience.

But what do you do when you are hooked like I am? I feel like a slave.

Yep, and I honestly think playing a game "blind" is so much better. Guides ruin surprises. However some games, like Catherine, and to an extent FallOut (if you remember to save for the level trophy's), have trophy's/achievements which compliment the game. They encourage you to play the game on the hardest difficulty and beat every side quest and get every ending (not hard in Catherine since you can skip levels on 2nd run throughs when you get a gold rank on them).

What would I do? What I did was be a slave like you, but then I got a Wii and started playing a few games without trophy's, and I dunno. The experience just made me stop caring. Wii doesn't have too many games, but some of them (XenoBlade, Zelda, Metroid Prime, etc) are real gems, worth buying the system just for them. However like I said, for individual games I still go for the platnium.

It's just who cares about the overall score? The people with the most platnium trophy's and gamer points play games like King Kong and Avatar, games which take <5 hours to get a platnium or a "completion" in. What I do is look into each game I get (after buying it), and decide is it worth it to complete? Is it worth getting a high score in? Also people with the most trophies limit themselves to easy PS3 games.

So like for me, games like Gears of War, I'll get 90% of the Gamerpoints for it. However I'm not going to invest a full year of playing the game online every day for that last 10% (yes it's that insane on some 360 exclusives). Same goes for Gran Turismo 5 on PS3. However Alan Wake has a pretty easy set of achievements, and so does InFamous on PS3, and I think the games are good enough for a second playthrough, even if they didn't have trophy's/achievements for it, I'd probably still play it again, so why not max out these games?

I'm still fairly addicted too, I won't play Mass Effect 3 until I get 100% in Mass Effect 2, and I don't want too many 400/1000's or 40% games to tarnish my record.

So what I do is just buy less games, and only get games I think I would enjoy playing enough to get a good score in.

In the rare case you have a game which isn't achievement/trophy frendly, I just try to get more then others lol.

 

So my advice is, moderation, only play games you know you'll get your moneys worth, and while you get your money's worth, you can pick up a few trophy's along the way, and get a Wii, or maybe a DS/PSP and start playing some games without a trophy/achievement system.

Great post. Lots of food for thought.

That Gears of war path to get 100% you described is ridiculous. It's just unfair.

It's not just the hunt for Plats but also those 40% games I don't like to have too many of either.

But I wanna be like Kyliedog and badgenome, their Trophy level is like 27 and 23 respectively.

I battle with my Trophy addiction every day lol.

But who cares? I mean some games just don't reward you as well as others. I mean I only have 42% in Dragon Ball Z: Burst Limit despite it being one of my favorite fighters. However whenever I compare my games to others, I'm always 10% above them or tied. So I'm happy that for one of my favorite games I have a high score.

It doesn't have to be perfect.

As for Kyliedog and badgegome, I guess they have more time to play games. Don' be ashamed that your level is lower then theres, maybe you just have more of a life. That is soemthing to be proud of.

I dunno, just for me it's much easier getting a high score in games I love. That way you feel satisfied once in a while It just sucks for RPG's because you are forced to use a guide, just to get a % which shows you put  lot of effort into the game (even though a lower % could just mean you spent more time, but without a guide).

But you know what? I have a GF, wonderful pets, a couple of real good IRL friends and a good if not great job, but the older I get, the more I just want time to play video games. I envy Kyliedog and badgenome so much cause they seem to have that time (and energy, it's also a matter of energy. If I have 6 hours of free time I only use 3 of them to play games because I just feel too tired and heavy in my head most of the time) to play through all those games and deeply experience them.