Sansui said:
forevercloud3000 said:
mrstickball said:
Jo -
Uhhh, FF gameplay is always changing? Care to tell me the differences between FFVI and FFX-2? There was a 10 year span between the games...Tell me what all was different.
Final Fantasy is trash because there are so many more deserving good JRPGs out there that are great, and never get the kind of press that FF gets in the west. |
What a delusional fanboy comment to make. There is no better deserving RPG franchise then FF other then Pokemon(which admittedly I love). Final Fantasy's formula is time tested and mother approved. They tend to always excel in multiple areas and bring a little something new every time. The games are similar but never identical.
FFVI had a full central party, consistent characters that did not change jobs.
FFX-2 gave option of allowing each character to be whatever job you saw fit for them
Both told great stories.
Both had awsome gameplay
No other RPG franchise is THAT consistent with each game.
|
Said the guy whose forum avatar and name are Cloud, the most generic hero in RPG history. At least you didn't pick that nutsack Tidus, so I have to give you *some* kudos on that.
Final Fantasy has been anything but a consistent series. The only thing they've ever been consistent on are production values. Story has ranged from excellent to mediocre to beyond terrible, same with characterization.
Don't call other people delusional fanboys when you think every Final Fantasy is great. That is the pinnacle of delusion.
|
I don't think some may realize it (because I'm always here on the MS forums), but I'd like to think that I'm one of the more robust Final Fantasy players and fans out there on the boards. I started with FF1 back in the very early 90s, and have played the majority of the series - only leaving out X and IX from play (aside from the unreleased II/IIIj series), and have spent countless hour on the series.
Yet the fact is, there are so many similarities between Final Fantasies, that you can argue what you want - it's still the same core game 95% of the time, as battles, skills, job classes, and augmentations are very similar from one game to another. Oh and of course, combat is almost always the same dang thing.
Good example: X and X2's job classes (X2's dressspheres) - You had job classes that any one could use, in FFV, which was made in........1992 or 93, if I'm not mistaken?
And FFVI did NOT have a full central party...WTF game were you playing? Once you got seltzers airship, you were free to build the party of your choice. Furthermore, although jobs weren't in VI (they were in V), Espers were used to customize each person's magical job role in the game.
The only real big changes in the series were VIII's junction system, and the craptacular way of drawing magic from enemies, and XII. XII is the true evolution of the series, and an actual change to Final Fantasy's core game dynamics - the battle system. Unfortunately, it seems that Square is going back to the old aged system for their battles. It's not that I dislike the ATB system, but XII was really awesome, despite the critics. And that comes from a guy that has a copy of FF1 about 15 feet away from where I'm typing this post.
Final Fantasy is like a schizophrenic cat - it keeps running back and forth to the same things "Jobs or No Jobs?" "ATB or Turn based" "Crappy storyline, or good one?" "Girly guys, or manly women?" "JRPG cliches' or real innovation?"
Sansui nailed it on the head - The only constant has been the beefy production values of the series, but many other things have been the same, with minor variants that are re-hashed from older titles.
This isn't to say I dislike Final Fantasy, but it makes me get very upset to see non-FF, non-DQ JRPGs get butchered in the ratings time and time again for being great JRPGs without the pedigree - something that most WRPG's don't seem to have an issue with. Tales of Vesperia, as of right now, is one of the best JRPGs I've played in quite some time...Yet the game has just above a 80% ranking on GameRankings, with most reviewers saying it's the best Tales game to date. WTF? Really? 80% is the best that the best Tales game can do?
It's like Grand Theft Auto for the sandbox genre - no matter how much another sandbox game can innovate, Grand Theft will automatically get the best scores, regardless of what it does, or doesn't do. Crackdown and Saints Row (2 off the top of my head) were awesome games, yet were about 15% lower than GTAIV in reviews...What gives?
I mean you could enjoy it even better on the PC right?
