zexen_lowe said: This would be just another review, if it weren't for the fact that I tend to trust a lot RPGFan's reviews because they're usually close to my tastes. I hope they're wrong this time becuase WKC looks great for me, definitely a game to play if I had a PS3 http://www.rpgfan.com/reviews/White_Knight_Chronicles/index.html Graphics: 85% Sound: 72% Gameplay: 72% Control: 74% Story: 68% Overall: 70% Conclusion At the end of the day, WKC is hard to recommend for people who are looking for a good offline stand-alone adventure. Even where the game innovates, specifically the battle and avatar systems, the game slips up by improperly balancing damage and incentives and making the player-created character totally inconsequential. The story campaign is easily completed in 25 to 30 hours, so really the game makes an excellent rental. If it’s online gaming that you are focused on, add a few points to my final score and have at it. I suspect there will be some patches and changes for the North American release, and if they address even some of the problems mentioned here, you will have a very worthwhile game. Ultimately I think the franchise has potential. Nevertheless, it’s still very skip-able for people with a long backlog of games to get into.

Zexen, I see you are a Suikoden fan.  Most Suikoden fans will say that 2 is the best, but RPGamer didn't score it too high.  And maybe the game (WKC) is overall deserving a 70%.  But for your sake, you might want to rethink what you are saying, given your Suikoden preference and RPGamer's opinion of it.

stop assuming things

My favorite FF is FF6.....so your not the one with some "higher knowledge of FF"

And the oconspiracy I'm talking about is clearly seen in the review threads of the 360 JRPG's I mentioned.....maybe you were living under a rock when everyone made up excuses for them getting bad reviews.

VC is a RPG from Japan....yes it has strategy elements.....but it is still an RPG from Japan and a new IP so if Western reviewers can't review JRPG's the rule will apply to VC too.

I happent o really like FF12 too.....so why the hell are we arguing again? oh yeah cus your generalizing faboys n pretending PS3 fans don't care about FF13 anymore.

Well, if the game is improved (like Eternal Sonata, and Oblivion), why not?  And even if it is not, are you implying that ALL PS3 owners bashed TLR because it was released on the 360 first?

"Famitsu are wrong!!"
"WKC is the PS3's FFVII!!"

Yeah, right. Told you this game will be mediocre. I dont want to hate on it or anything, but the amount of hype this game got just because it's "the first high-profile PS3 exclusive jRPG!" was enormous. There never was anything special or interesting about this title. It always looked mehish and the only good thing about it is FFXII-like battle system.

I still hope that diehard jRPG fans will enjoy this game though, but I'll pass.

@Infamous
VC is indeed a JRPG, if you'd like to have that argument I'll be more than happy to.

Second, yes someone will say that TLR isn't so bad ("isn't so bad" of course meaning it's just slighly below average, which is right where reviews put it so yay), you can always find someone. It happens on every single console so I really don't see why you're saying it like you are some kind of prophet. Tell me it won't happen and then I'll start to listen.

Jordahn said: zexen_lowe said: This would be just another review, if it weren't for the fact that I tend to trust a lot RPGFan's reviews because they're usually close to my tastes. I hope they're wrong this time becuase WKC looks great for me, definitely a game to play if I had a PS3 http://www.rpgfan.com/reviews/White_Knight_Chronicles/index.html Graphics: 85% Sound: 72% Gameplay: 72% Control: 74% Story: 68% Overall: 70% Conclusion At the end of the day, WKC is hard to recommend for people who are looking for a good offline stand-alone adventure. Even where the game innovates, specifically the battle and avatar systems, the game slips up by improperly balancing damage and incentives and making the player-created character totally inconsequential. The story campaign is easily completed in 25 to 30 hours, so really the game makes an excellent rental. If it’s online gaming that you are focused on, add a few points to my final score and have at it. I suspect there will be some patches and changes for the North American release, and if they address even some of the problems mentioned here, you will have a very worthwhile game. Ultimately I think the franchise has potential. Nevertheless, it’s still very skip-able for people with a long backlog of games to get into.   Zexen, I see you are a Suikoden fan.  Most Suikoden fans will say that 2 is the best, but RPGamer didn't score it too high.  And maybe the game (WKC) is overall deserving a 70%.  But for your sake, you might want to rethink what you are saying, given your Suikoden preference and RPGamer's opinion of it.

RPGFan, not RPGamer. RPGamer sucks, it's a terrible site and a disgrace for RPG fans.

I get what you say, I'm not saying that since the site gave it a 70% the game is automatically not worth it, and I'm not saying that I agree with every review the site has posted (they overrated DQ8 and KH, and, as you said, underrated Suikoden II -though they gave the game an 82%, I think, not bad by any stretch).

But RPGFan gained a lot of points in my book by being one of the very few sites that gave Suikoden V the high 90 score (95% I think), because that game is one of the best RPGs of the PS2. They also gave 90+ to SO3, Xenosaga 1/3, SMT Nocturne, Persona 3, Persona 4, Suikoden III, games that I loved and most of them are very underrated in general (Persona 4 being the biggest exception since it got high critical acclaim everywhere). Overall, I'm not saying that the review means that the game automatically sucks, only that I trust more a high score (or conversely, a low score) of RPGFan than I do of, say, Gamespot, IGN or 1UP

I am with Zexen on this, I trust RPGfan alot so this is fairly damning. Being a huge JRPG fan I will still enjoy playing it even if it is only average (Just like I still enjoyed ES) but it may not be quite as good as I hoped.

That said RPGfan does have some differences between import reviews and later ones (I notice this particularly for VC) so we'll just have to wait and see.

zexen_lowe said: Jordahn said: zexen_lowe said: This would be just another review, if it weren't for the fact that I tend to trust a lot RPGFan's reviews because they're usually close to my tastes. I hope they're wrong this time becuase WKC looks great for me, definitely a game to play if I had a PS3 http://www.rpgfan.com/reviews/White_Knight_Chronicles/index.html Graphics: 85% Sound: 72% Gameplay: 72% Control: 74% Story: 68% Overall: 70% Conclusion At the end of the day, WKC is hard to recommend for people who are looking for a good offline stand-alone adventure. Even where the game innovates, specifically the battle and avatar systems, the game slips up by improperly balancing damage and incentives and making the player-created character totally inconsequential. The story campaign is easily completed in 25 to 30 hours, so really the game makes an excellent rental. If it’s online gaming that you are focused on, add a few points to my final score and have at it. I suspect there will be some patches and changes for the North American release, and if they address even some of the problems mentioned here, you will have a very worthwhile game. Ultimately I think the franchise has potential. Nevertheless, it’s still very skip-able for people with a long backlog of games to get into.   Zexen, I see you are a Suikoden fan.  Most Suikoden fans will say that 2 is the best, but RPGamer didn't score it too high.  And maybe the game (WKC) is overall deserving a 70%.  But for your sake, you might want to rethink what you are saying, given your Suikoden preference and RPGamer's opinion of it. RPGFan, not RPGamer. RPGamer sucks, it's a terrible site and a disgrace for RPG fans. I get what you say, I'm not saying that since the site gave it a 70% the game is automatically not worth it, and I'm not saying that I agree with every review the site has posted (they overrated DQ8 and KH, and, as you said, underrated Suikoden II -though they gave the game an 82%, I think, not bad by any stretch). But RPGFan gained a lot of points in my book by being one of the very few sites that gave Suikoden V the high 90 score (95% I think), because that game is one of the best RPGs of the PS2. They also gave 90+ to SO3, Xenosaga 1/3, SMT Nocturne, Persona 3, Persona 4, Suikoden III, games that I loved and most of them are very underrated in general (Persona 4 being the biggest exception since it got high critical acclaim everywhere). Overall, I'm not saying that the review means that the game automatically sucks, only that I trust more a high score (or conversely, a low score) of RPGFan than I do of, say, Gamespot, IGN or 1UP

Ahh... I read your original post too fast.  I'm sorry for that, and I stand corrected.  And now that you pointed out some of their reviews of other RPG's, I must say I agree with most of them (with the exception of Suikoden III and SO3).

I thought VC was an SRPG?

VC is an RPG from Japan, therefore it is a JRPG.

VC is a strategy RPG, therefore it is also an SRPG.

Basically the delineations are JRPG vs. WRPG which is based on where the game is from and its general style. And then separate delineations for Action RPG, Turnbased RPG, and Strategy RPG which are based on the combat styles