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

Forums - Sony - RPGFan reviews an import copy of Persona 4 - 94%! RPG of the Year for sure!

Mirson on 17 September 2008
c0rd said:

Sorta off topic, but I recently took notice of Persona... should I play 1 & 2 before 3? Are the games related in any way?

Persona 1 & 2 are related, story wise of course. You don't have to play them in order to understand 3. 3 is on its own. Different characters, story, etc. Anyways have you seen how much 1 & 2 costs on ebay? I do recommend playing P3 before P4.



Around the Network
Cactus on 17 September 2008

I'm literally counting down the days until this gets released. I've got it preordered from amazon.ca. The only problem is that I've got a freaking midterm around the 9th of Dec.



shio on 17 September 2008

RPGfan isn't what I call a decent site for reviews. The site is overrun by jRPG fans, so the PC RPGs get the shaft (the fact that PS2 probably has more higher-rated titles by RPGfan than PC proves my point).

atleast it's not as bad as RPGamer.



http://i48.tinypic.com/120qaon.jpg
Torillian on 17 September 2008

PRetty expected from RGPfan.com, they really enjoyed the last Persona, gave it goty for 08.

@shio, that works perfectly well for those of us that prefer jRPG's over WRPG's.



...

obieslut on 17 September 2008

why ps2 though



Around the Network
c03n3nj0 on 17 September 2008

Ohh looks nice. I'm going ot search about that game 'cause I don't anything about it. Or Persona in general, lol.



 Tag (Courtesy of Fkusumot) "If I'm posting in this thread then it's probally a spam thread."                               

Kasz216 on 17 September 2008
Riachu said:
zexen_lowe said:
Riachu said:
RPGFan aren't always reliable. They gave Lost Odyssey a 75% when I think that game deserves an 85%. Even so, they aren't the first ones to say that Persona 4 is awesome(that title belongs to 1UP). Western critics seem to like Persona 3 and 4 more than Japanese critics.

 

Of course they aren't flawless (they overrated Dragon Quest VIII and Kingdom Hearts I) but in general they do reviews that are pretty similar to my tastes (for example, they are one of the few sites that gave Suikoden V the score it deserves, in the high 90's), so I tend to trust them, and I know that they review according to what a JRPG player wants, they won't rate down a game "because it has too many cutscenes" or because it has random battles" like a more general gaming site would

The random battle complaint is more valid than you think.  A lot of the JRPGs with random battles tend to have high encounter rate.  I find it more tolerable in LO because the encounter rate in that game is low.

 

Random Encounters was one of the biggest problems i had with a lot of RPGS.

I mean... they have had Random Encounters where you could see and try and avoid the monsters since at least the NES.

Heck, SQUARE was doing it in other RPGS on the SNES.

I can't figure why they stuck with the invisible step encounters on their main franchise.



Khuutra on 17 September 2008
Kasz216 said:
Riachu said:
zexen_lowe said:
Riachu said:
RPGFan aren't always reliable. They gave Lost Odyssey a 75% when I think that game deserves an 85%. Even so, they aren't the first ones to say that Persona 4 is awesome(that title belongs to 1UP). Western critics seem to like Persona 3 and 4 more than Japanese critics.

 

Of course they aren't flawless (they overrated Dragon Quest VIII and Kingdom Hearts I) but in general they do reviews that are pretty similar to my tastes (for example, they are one of the few sites that gave Suikoden V the score it deserves, in the high 90's), so I tend to trust them, and I know that they review according to what a JRPG player wants, they won't rate down a game "because it has too many cutscenes" or because it has random battles" like a more general gaming site would

The random battle complaint is more valid than you think.  A lot of the JRPGs with random battles tend to have high encounter rate.  I find it more tolerable in LO because the encounter rate in that game is low.

 

Random Encounters was one of the biggest problems i had with a lot of RPGS.

I mean... they have had Random Encounters where you could see and try and avoid the monsters since at least the NES.

Heck, SQUARE was doing it in other RPGS on the SNES.

I can't figure why they stuck with the invisible step encounters on their main franchise.

 

They didn't.



zexen_lowe on 17 September 2008
Riachu said:
zexen_lowe said:
Riachu said:
RPGFan aren't always reliable. They gave Lost Odyssey a 75% when I think that game deserves an 85%. Even so, they aren't the first ones to say that Persona 4 is awesome(that title belongs to 1UP). Western critics seem to like Persona 3 and 4 more than Japanese critics.

 

Of course they aren't flawless (they overrated Dragon Quest VIII and Kingdom Hearts I) but in general they do reviews that are pretty similar to my tastes (for example, they are one of the few sites that gave Suikoden V the score it deserves, in the high 90's), so I tend to trust them, and I know that they review according to what a JRPG player wants, they won't rate down a game "because it has too many cutscenes" or because it has random battles" like a more general gaming site would

The random battle complaint is more valid than you think.  A lot of the JRPGs with random battles tend to have high encounter rate.  I find it more tolerable in LO because the encounter rate in that game is low.

 

If the game has a higher encounter rate, then the complaint is fine, but there the problem lies not in the random battle thing but on how it's applied. If the game has a normal or low rate (Suikoden III and FFX come to mind), it's not really a problem

 




Kasz216 on 18 September 2008
Khuutra said:
Kasz216 said:
Riachu said:
zexen_lowe said:
Riachu said:
RPGFan aren't always reliable. They gave Lost Odyssey a 75% when I think that game deserves an 85%. Even so, they aren't the first ones to say that Persona 4 is awesome(that title belongs to 1UP). Western critics seem to like Persona 3 and 4 more than Japanese critics.

 

Of course they aren't flawless (they overrated Dragon Quest VIII and Kingdom Hearts I) but in general they do reviews that are pretty similar to my tastes (for example, they are one of the few sites that gave Suikoden V the score it deserves, in the high 90's), so I tend to trust them, and I know that they review according to what a JRPG player wants, they won't rate down a game "because it has too many cutscenes" or because it has random battles" like a more general gaming site would

The random battle complaint is more valid than you think.  A lot of the JRPGs with random battles tend to have high encounter rate.  I find it more tolerable in LO because the encounter rate in that game is low.

 

Random Encounters was one of the biggest problems i had with a lot of RPGS.

I mean... they have had Random Encounters where you could see and try and avoid the monsters since at least the NES.

Heck, SQUARE was doing it in other RPGS on the SNES.

I can't figure why they stuck with the invisible step encounters on their main franchise.

 

They didn't.

What? Stick with it... they did until like FF11... which was way unnessesary.

Or have monsters on map in their other RPGs?  Cause they did.  Chono Trigger for one.