I didn't see this in the reviews, but I'm wondering what the ratio of gameplay to cutscenes is. To hold my attention, a turn-based RPG usually needs to lean toward the "dungeon crawler" side of the equation (see: Shin Megami Tensei; Dragon Quest VIII). I'm not too encouraged by the size of the game (how many DVDs is it again??), but I might take a gander at the game anyway.

Either way, encouraging reviews. I was expecting something in the 7s since I heard about the performance issues.

If games are reviewed based on past games the review is biased, end of story.

Maybe it's only my philosophy, but a game is supposed to be reviewed based on a stand-alone opinion, not an opinion that relates to past games. You can factor in a little bit, but you shouldn't make a blatant attempt to degrade a game based on past games...

Chrono being mentioned, Chrono Cross is always degraded because it's not Chrono Trigger. If it were Chrono Trigger, it'd be hammered. Since it's not, it's still hammered. It's not a fair game review, and I'm sure most reviewers will not give Lost Odyssey a fair review.

How does Halo 3 get such an insane review over Halo 2, which got an insane review over Halo 1? I'd think Halo 2 would have gotten an 8, and Halo 3 maybe an 8.2 for improvements, and docked because it's almost the same game still.

naznatips said: God I hope every game doesn't start copying FF. FF has sucked since it went 3D (with the notable exception of FFIX), and there are dozens upon dozens of JRPGs that I'd rather play than the other 3D FF games. FF is the most casual RPG in existence, and I'm including Pokemon in that. It lives on the idea that if it has pretty graphics it doesn't matter if everything else sucks, and that's what sells it. So, I'm sorry to hear that LO is copying Final Fantasy. I'll stick with good JRPGs thanks. PS: Blue Dragon was a much better game than reviewers gave it credit for.

WOW is like your in my head.

Oh, it also makes you wonder if FF games only get higher ratings because of the name - any other game like the franchise is dissed because it's not FF? That's funny. Maybe FF shouldn't be classified as a JRPG, but a FFRPG, that way other games not titled FF can have a fair chance, lol

facher83 said: If games are reviewed based on past games the review is biased, end of story. Maybe it's only my philosophy, but a game is supposed to be reviewed based on a stand-alone opinion, not an opinion that relates to past games. You can factor in a little bit, but you shouldn't make a blatant attempt to degrade a game based on past games... Chrono being mentioned, Chrono Cross is always degraded because it's not Chrono Trigger. If it were Chrono Trigger, it'd be hammered. Since it's not, it's still hammered. It's not a fair game review, and I'm sure most reviewers will not give Lost Odyssey a fair review. How does Halo 3 get such an insane review over Halo 2, which got an insane review over Halo 1? I'd think Halo 2 would have gotten an 8, and Halo 3 maybe an 8.2 for improvements, and docked because it's almost the same game still.

 

QFT especially with RPGS. Why do people want games to strive for FF lol.  Wouldn't you want a different story and gameplay etc.  One thing I loved about rpgs back in the day was the difference with games I mentioned before like grandia, lufia, breath of fire, shining force, secret of mana among many many more.  What I truly enjoyed where the stories and the different take they each had on battling.  Yes most where turn-based but they tried different things here and there to set themselves apart.  They didn't reinvent the wheel as at the core they where turn-based.  By the way I don't mind the reviews as that is their opinion.  I don't expect people to like the things I do but I do try my best to share my opinion and if it differs have a discussion.  I loved cod4 but in the end it wasn't anything I hadn't done before in other shooters same with just about every game.  I love Mass Effect but what was new was the dialog chat and story but other than that everything else I done before.  In away is like movies where most follow similar patters of drama,comedy,action etc but the directors put their own unique perspective to make it stand out our different but in the end they still fall in those categorys and people will watch them.  Sorry if it sounds like a rant heh

>Oh, it also makes you wonder if FF games only get higher ratings because of the name -

I'd say it's definitely true in Japan.

but the same is true for Halo 3, SMG, Zelda.... so on.

elnino334 said: facher83 said: If games are reviewed based on past games the review is biased, end of story. Maybe it's only my philosophy, but a game is supposed to be reviewed based on a stand-alone opinion, not an opinion that relates to past games. You can factor in a little bit, but you shouldn't make a blatant attempt to degrade a game based on past games... Chrono being mentioned, Chrono Cross is always degraded because it's not Chrono Trigger. If it were Chrono Trigger, it'd be hammered. Since it's not, it's still hammered. It's not a fair game review, and I'm sure most reviewers will not give Lost Odyssey a fair review. How does Halo 3 get such an insane review over Halo 2, which got an insane review over Halo 1? I'd think Halo 2 would have gotten an 8, and Halo 3 maybe an 8.2 for improvements, and docked because it's almost the same game still.   QFT especially with RPGS. Why do people want games to strive for FF lol. Wouldn't you want a different story and gameplay etc. One thing I loved about rpgs back in the day was the difference with games I mentioned before like grandia, lufia, breath of fire, shining force, secret of mana among many many more. What I truly enjoyed where the stories and the different take they each had on battling. Yes most where turn-based but they tried different things here and there to set themselves apart. They didn't reinvent the wheel as at the core they where turn-based. By the way I don't mind the reviews as that is their opinion. I don't expect people to like the things I do but I do try my best to share my opinion and if it differs have a discussion. I loved cod4 but in the end it wasn't anything I hadn't done before in other shooters same with just about every game. I love Mass Effect but what was new was the dialog chat and story but other than that everything else I done before. In away is like movies where most follow similar patters of drama,comedy,action etc but the directors put their own unique perspective to make it stand out our different but in the end they still fall in those categorys and people will watch them. Sorry if it sounds like a rant heh

My god I've been cloned. 

starcraft said: Copied from the review. This should give everyone an idea about whether the reviewer was ever going to give the title a fair shake or not. He clearly went in thinking "if it's like Final Fantasy i'm marking it down for copying. If its not like Final Fantasy, im marking it down for not being like Final Fantasy." The source? Final Fantasy VII through XII. The game is a checklist of things you've seen and done before. For example, the areas in the game traverse locations that are reminiscent of things like the prison in FFVIII, the enormous defensive gun, Mako production facilities, snowfields, mining areas (and a lot more) from VII, the opulent cities and streets of XII, and the characters run the gamut of generica. Such traditional development is a problem for two reasons. One, it keeps happening and players keep buying into it, which means that it'll continue. Two, every time I have to play as a stoic lead character with no past who is out to save a dying world, it makes me want to cut someone – and it just might happen. It gets to the point where you can start picking the twists just by looking at the character design. That's bad. By the time the loveable rogue meets the rambunctious princess and they start to fall for each other, you'll either reach for your copy of Final Fantasy IX or go all gooey because you've never played an RPG before.

Well considering that "you" are playing a character who remembers NOTHING, I'd find it a little strange if you knew all about your past at the very beginning of the game. The whole point of the game is that you slowly remember your own past, throughout the game. It's the same with the other immortal characters in the LO, too...

WHY all the FF HATE suddenly

because a bunch of reviewers are comparing it to FF....

Gee wiz. Either they are all reviewing imported japanese versions with english subtitles, or the framerate must get really bad on the last three disks. I seriously havent encountered a SINGLE issue.