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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Final Fantasy 13 review.... so far

gustave154 said:
its a linear FF IMO
quite disappointing when compared to the last gen FF which is FFX.

i personally dont care about whether  it is linear or not, but i thought it was the same as ffx  in that sense. 



Around the Network
LordTheNightKnight said:
My big "nay" isn't quite to the game as much as to many HD games in general. This game so far is reported to be good, but not groundbreaking. As in it's almost literally a bigger, better looking, flashier, and most expensive game that could have been done last gen.

Not to say HD required games don't exist, just that many of these games have little new other than the "wow" factor (which means a lot of the cost is often about raw novelty). But with this game specifically, it does look pretty (and Vanille just hits quite a few of my turn-ons), but the story is one of the least compelling FF stories I've seen.

Perhaps the gameplay will make up for that, but I'm just doing a wait-and-see here (since I know better than to outright pass judgment before I actually get to try it).

true but then again, companies need to surrive and this is their main option. i wouldnt blame them as i would blame the gamer. Also i truely believe that battle system will make up for that. One thing i really think that ff13 did better than every other game is the ally ai. it is extremely smart in this game. 



Buzzi said:
outlawauron said:
chapset said:
23 hours and already at chapter 11 of 13 does that mean the story is shorter then previous ff games or are you skipping a lot of side quests

Well, to be honest nearly all FF games can be completed in 30-40 hours doing a few sidequests.

Was I dreaing or SE say that the game would last 12 hours an maybe up to 20 with all the side quests?? They don't even know how long their game can be? over 20 hours is a good amount of hours actually IMO!

so far i just beat chapter 11 and have 34 hours now, i went from 22 to 34 in one chapter, mainly because of grinding but you have to grind one point or another. 



a12331 said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
My big "nay" isn't quite to the game as much as to many HD games in general. This game so far is reported to be good, but not groundbreaking. As in it's almost literally a bigger, better looking, flashier, and most expensive game that could have been done last gen.

Not to say HD required games don't exist, just that many of these games have little new other than the "wow" factor (which means a lot of the cost is often about raw novelty). But with this game specifically, it does look pretty (and Vanille just hits quite a few of my turn-ons), but the story is one of the least compelling FF stories I've seen.

Perhaps the gameplay will make up for that, but I'm just doing a wait-and-see here (since I know better than to outright pass judgment before I actually get to try it).

true but then again, companies need to surrive and this is their main option. i wouldnt blame them as i would blame the gamer. Also i truely believe that battle system will make up for that. One thing i really think that ff13 did better than every other game is the ally ai. it is extremely smart in this game. 

Main option? It's only the most commonly chosen, and the cost shows it's not a good one. It's not a way to survive. It's a way to lose your shirt just to wow some critics and so that developers can pretend they are great filmmakers instead of great game makers.

Even Nintendo has fallen for that in some ways.

I'd take being able to not surrender to guards (not sure if this game does something like that, but it's a railroad story regardless) over flashy cutscenes any day.



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs

LordTheNightKnight said:
a12331 said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
My big "nay" isn't quite to the game as much as to many HD games in general. This game so far is reported to be good, but not groundbreaking. As in it's almost literally a bigger, better looking, flashier, and most expensive game that could have been done last gen.

Not to say HD required games don't exist, just that many of these games have little new other than the "wow" factor (which means a lot of the cost is often about raw novelty). But with this game specifically, it does look pretty (and Vanille just hits quite a few of my turn-ons), but the story is one of the least compelling FF stories I've seen.

Perhaps the gameplay will make up for that, but I'm just doing a wait-and-see here (since I know better than to outright pass judgment before I actually get to try it).

true but then again, companies need to surrive and this is their main option. i wouldnt blame them as i would blame the gamer. Also i truely believe that battle system will make up for that. One thing i really think that ff13 did better than every other game is the ally ai. it is extremely smart in this game. 

Main option? It's only the most commonly chosen, and the cost shows it's not a good one. It's not a way to survive. It's a way to lose your shirt just to wow some critics and so that developers can pretend they are great filmmakers instead of great game makers.

Even Nintendo has fallen for that in some ways.

I'd take being able to not surrender to guards (not sure if this game does something like that, but it's a railroad story regardless) over flashy cutscenes any day.

i understand your point and i mostly agree. though i am one of those that likes cutscenes, mainly because they draw me into the world of the game. 



Around the Network
KylieDog said:
I don't like the idea of only controlling one party member, especially if the others will not use items on you.

then again it is a fast pace battle system, to the point that it would be extremely difficult controlling all the characters at once. as for the items, i once you treain your healer role, you wont have to use items like in almost every ff. 



they should made this game open world like ff XII, but ff X was linear and it was a great game so i hope this game is too.



a12331 said:
Buzzi said:
outlawauron said:
chapset said:
23 hours and already at chapter 11 of 13 does that mean the story is shorter then previous ff games or are you skipping a lot of side quests

Well, to be honest nearly all FF games can be completed in 30-40 hours doing a few sidequests.

Was I dreaing or SE say that the game would last 12 hours an maybe up to 20 with all the side quests?? They don't even know how long their game can be? over 20 hours is a good amount of hours actually IMO!

so far i just beat chapter 11 and have 34 hours now, i went from 22 to 34 in one chapter, mainly because of grinding but you have to grind one point or another. 

What the...stupid me! I thought you're speaking of FFCC for Wii...sorry, I think I should sleep more :)



CURRENTLY PLAYING: Xenoblade (Wii), Super mario 3D land (3DS), Guild Wars (PC)

 

I was stopped at the boss of chapter 11,it's too hard for me,although some one has told me the tactic to break it.When i arrived at chapter 11,the most thing i did is sneaking,the enemies here were nightmare for me.



Buzzi said:
a12331 said:
Buzzi said:
outlawauron said:
chapset said:
23 hours and already at chapter 11 of 13 does that mean the story is shorter then previous ff games or are you skipping a lot of side quests

Well, to be honest nearly all FF games can be completed in 30-40 hours doing a few sidequests.

Was I dreaing or SE say that the game would last 12 hours an maybe up to 20 with all the side quests?? They don't even know how long their game can be? over 20 hours is a good amount of hours actually IMO!

so far i just beat chapter 11 and have 34 hours now, i went from 22 to 34 in one chapter, mainly because of grinding but you have to grind one point or another. 

What the...stupid me! I thought you're speaking of FFCC for Wii...sorry, I think I should sleep more :)

lol no prob