I'm buying this no matter what. My favorite RPG isn't even over 65% on gamerankings, so I don't care about reviews when it comes to RPG's. The only JRPG that gets good scores is overrated Final Fantasy anyways.

Gamespot's 7.5 brought that down.

Well, I hope that a brand new 2008 game surpasses a game released in 2002 (i think).

Standards change. That's why Tekken 3 is rated even higher than it sequels. Even the previous games were beter, they didn't improve enough. Much like the transition from GT3 to GT4.

Then you won't like Metacritic. Lost Odyssey is a 73. See for yourself: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbox360/lostodyssey

Based on 13 reviews

I really do not buy into the punitive innovation marks that reviewers toss around. They are irresponsible, and more to the point they aren't very relevant. Unless someone is playing a massive catalog of games on a daily bases it doesn't matter to your average consumer either. Yes the consumer is ignorant of the last one hundred and fifty games in the genre for the most part. Seeing as its highly unlikely they have played more then ten of those.

Call it elitist or call it jaded, but reviewers shouldn't be reviewing games in a way that only applies to other reviewers. I don't care if they have seen it before or where or how often. This is a prime example of why reviewers need to be recycled out of the industry after a few years. They start to fixate on things like lack or originality, or ambient noise effects. Thats when you can tell their perspective is fading fast.

The real twisted thing about the debate is there is no rhyme or reason to a reviewers madness when it comes to the holy grail of originality. They allow games exemptions for all sorts of contrived reasons. Games being sold on the virtual console most certainly aren't held to the same standards or are getting punished for now being terribly unoriginal. Other genres aren't even required to make the effort. Sports games are a prime example they have been running off the same mechanics for years now. They all look very much the same, and there are few risks being taken.

Originality isn't a real reviewing criteria its what someone who is very bored desperately wants. They don't care if its even good they just want something totally different from the standard model. Even if nobody has a problem with the standard model. I want my reviewers to be concrete and down to earth. I don't want them reprimanding games because they aren't something else. Do you seriously hold it against a sports car for not having a five ton carrying capacity.

http://kotaku.com/355853/lost-odyssey-impressions

Lost Odyssey Impressions

lo1.jpg Here's a turnup for the books. I got my copy of Lost Odyssey about a week ago, and with memories of how sick I got of Blue Dragon still lingering in my mind, popped it into my 360 and prepared for the worst. As one hour became two and that became four, it was looking like I'd prepared adequately.

Random battles? Jesus. A fixed camera? Give me a break. An effeminate, amnesiac hero with a large sword? Way to break the mould, Gooch. Things weren't looking good. Then a funny thing happens. You reach a point in the game - I won't give it away, but I will say somebody dies - where you find yourself absolutely enthralled in what's going on around you.

And it has little to do with the "game". Lost Odyssey is a solid, if unspectacular example of a JRPG, one which almost seems to revel in keeping things simple. If, for example, you've grown accustomed to things like FFXII's quasi-real-time battles, forget it. Lost Odyssey's static, random stoushes will feel like a trip back to 1998. Which for some (ie the people already hyped for a purchase) is great news, but others? Not so great. Lucky for this game, then, that the "game" part isn't what carries it.

lo2.jpg Because you see, Lost Odyssey isn't really a game. OK, it is, and it's a pretty decent one, but bear with me. The Gooch said as much himself, when he offered that the game was about emotion, not innovation. It's about the story, the world, the experience. And I'm man enough to admit that, as the tears flowed down the character's Unreal Engine 3-animated faces upon the aforementioned moment of death, that emotion had me hooked.

And you stay hooked. Between the gorgeous visual style of the game (SHOCK: The Unreal Engine can do blue skies!), Uematsu's excellent score and a cast of characters unusually compelling for the genre, you'll soon be enjoying the story just as much, if not more than, the wandering, chatting and combat. Oh, and reading. Lots of reading. Playing the role of Kaim, an immortal man struggling as 1000 years of forgotten memories come flooding back to him, you not only play through his current quest, but revisit his past lives through constant flashbacks as well.

These take the form of short stories, each written by acclaimed Japanese author Kiyoshi Shigematsu. They're usually a massive pain in the arse, both for their unnecessarily long duration and the frequency with which they interrupt the action. At the same time, though, it's hard not to be impressed with the sheer amount of work that's gone into rounding out the game world, and if you can be bothered reading up on them (if not, they're easily skipped), they're a great way to prolong the experience and immerse yourself in Kaim's story.

The voice-acting is also surprisingly good, considering there's so much of it and that the game ships with three language tracks (English, Japanese & Korean), which I guess goes some of the way towards explaining the four discs the game arrives on. The rest of that data is probably taken up with the game's cutscenes, which seem to trigger every 5-10 minutes, and at times feel endless, some leaving you stranded without gameplay for upwards of 20 minutes.

lo3.jpg And you know what? Again, like the camera and combat (which to be honest I prefer, I like to keep things simple), that doesn't matter. Because if you're the type of person who enjoys their JRPGs, and enjoys these sweeping, grand tales of empires and heroes and big swords and big breasts and magic, you'll most likely be digging the cutscenes, which are well-acted, well-animated and well-written. If you don't enjoy that kind of stuff, why the fuck are you still reading this far? This isn't for you.

So, is this a revolutionary JRPG, one that will help drive hardware sales and light a fire under Final Fantasy? Hahah. Hell no. It's all a bit too "traditional" for that. It is, however, better than Blue Dragon in almost every respect. It's more mature, better looking and definitely more polished. And it's definitely the best JRPG on the 360 at the moment, so if these kind of games are your thing, you may have to get used to the idea of spending 100+ hours in front of a 360 game.

I mean, they're both in the seventies, so it's really like the lesser of two evils right?

Don't you own Blue Dragon? Just because a game's average score is in the 70s doesnt make it bad in the fact that the games seemed to get butchered by reviewers, yet praised by fans (LO is #22 overall for user rated games on gamerankings.com)

Is someone complaing about frame rate drops in a turn based RPG?

Seriously...?

Unless things go Super slow mo... i don't even know why that would ever be a problem... or even how RPGS can have slowdowns honestly.

I agree with Mr. Stickball though. Turn based RPGS in general can't get a fair shake. Then again i may say this because I like Turn based RPGS.

@ mrstickball

yeah, i do own bd, but I didn't finish it, it's an okay game, so this game is only a little better than that. And I didn't like that game.