Duh, don't you see why I said that? :O

Am I the only person on this forum who thinks BD is a better game than LO?

Are all of you really that stuck on art style? You can argue the merits of LO's story but I don't see how anyone could possibly argue that the actual play of LO was better than BD.

LO=FF VII gameplay with one timed action event per attack
BD=Wonderful combination of timed action events (that involve strategy, not only reflexes) mixed with real-time action, and a very interesting group battle dynamic. Plus, NO RANDOM ENCOUNTERS!

Art style is only part of it. It's all about the characters with me. It was nice to place a game that wasn't "kids save the world." I could understand why Kaim was the way he was. He wasn't some emo kid. He was a guy that watched everyone he cared about die while he lived on. Very interesting character. Shu wasn't near as interesting. I liked BD a lot. I enjoyed game play but the characters and story did not grab me.

The artstyle on BD is certainly annoying, but it is not as annoying as that little kid who "won't give up". Having heard that line for a few times, I never wanted to play that game again. Argh.

Which is why I think you can argue the merits of the story.

Still, it's hard to say that LO's story was so much better that it outweighed BD's drastically better gameplay.

I admit that BD's characters were kinda annoying. But, so were LO's. Not as bad, but still annoying, especially the children.

Still, that kind of disparity between the games' stories and their play doesn't explain the 95/5 Lost Odyssey preference I see on this board.

For JRPG's usually you think first about the story over the battle system, atleast that's what most of the fans I know do. I have a few games on my list of favorites JRPG's that have incredibly uninspired Battle systems, but the stories are great and that's what I really look for in a JRPG.

So in conclusion, if they see a difference in the quality of he stories I can definitely see why someone would pick LO over BD.

There are a few that like BD more than LO....I'm always suprised at the amount of dislike BD gets over LO, because I agree that there was far more innovation in BD - and it was better-executed, overall, than LO.

Both have their strengths over the other - Blue Dragon's combat, ecounter and class system are better than Lost Odyssey, and did take the turn-based genre forward a bit. Lost Odyssey had deeper characters, and a more involved, better plot.

I'd put both around the same mark if it wasn't for the annoying Maru Maru.

I think Mistwalker would have enjoyed a lot more Success if the President didnt hate Kutaragi. maybe now they will see that the key place to selling a RPG is in Japan itself. LO and BD on PS3? would have done alot better as Multi-plats or PS3 exclusives I mean look at the RPGS on the PS3 (Not many but lets see whats there) and you will see that Valkyria Chronicles(Which is a S-JRPG and Sold more than Tales of Vesperia with a total of 0.15m in japan) and the newly released White Knight Chronicles which has sold more on its first day(132,000) then LO, BD and TOV's life time sales

I don't think this game was ever highly advertised because the only place I ever heard it mentioned that much was on message boards where 360 fans who kept up with such things were saying that this was one of the big jrpgs coming to the 360. Also, I don't think this means the end of either Mistwalker or of good jrpgs on the 360 which is actually the implied subtext.

Both are mixed bags TBH.

Gameplay wise, BD is better. However the characters blow and the narrative is so cliché. I felt the game started weak but steadily improved (the ending dungeon and the state of the world when the game is over are terrific).

LO gameplay isn't as fluid but the characters are better and the narrative is improved. Unlike BD, LO starts stronger but loses steam towards the end because it gets a generic Final Fantasy ending setting along with overpowered skills for the inmortals.