instead of dogging other people for liking something I can't see the enjoyment in.
Yes, but that's a two-way street. And again, most people around here aren't trying to insult those who like the game, just some people seem to take personal offense to people having criticisms. So yeah, also maybe people should stop trying to tell others what they're supposed to enjoy.
I have fallen numerous times in my life, so I know quite well that it hurts. I have also studied some physics and biology. And I've read about numerous falling accidents.
But I've never jumped off a cliff before. It might be fun! I won't know unless I try it!
Okay my falling friend, if you go sky diving do you want to trust an instructor who's sky dived and experienced it, or one that has read up on it and watched others do it?
Now perhaps you see my point because last time I tried to explain I fell short.
Okay my falling friend, if you go sky diving do you want to trust an instructor who's sky dived and experienced it, or one that has read up on it and watched others do it?
Now perhaps you see my point because last time I tried to explain I fell short.
I appreciate the pun but you're missing the point entirely. Namely that it is possible to roughly gauge an experience without having undergone it.
Okay my falling friend, if you go sky diving do you want to trust an instructor who's sky dived and experienced it, or one that has read up on it and watched others do it?
Now perhaps you see my point because last time I tried to explain I fell short.
Lul, no dude. Your scenario assumes the point that we're arguing which is human intelligence allows us to infer/reach perfectly reasonable conclusions even based on not perfectly complete data sets.
Which is if we take the premise to heart on which some people here seem to be operating the answer to this case would be, it doesn't matter which instructor I choose. I wouldn't be able to know the difference based on that information until I'm going to receive instruction anyway. Which I hope you see is soooooo goddamn stupid it triggers me a little.
That's fair, I appreciate the good conversation gentlemen, like usual I came off as ignorant and rash rereading my comments, but I tried ;) Have a goodnight, come over if you want to talk One Piece or play FFXV!
Didn't mean your life was just ATTEMPTING to make a point buddy :)
You did make a point. You commented on something without experiencing it.
Allowing me to do the same.
No offense has been taken I'm just saying, we freely comment on things without experiencing them all the time. It's okay to do.
However, in this case, we experienced much of what the game has to offer and therefore are not simply commenting freely but taking the sum of our experiences with said medium and making an informed critique of it.
No single person is saying, "This game cannot be fun for you."
We're saying, "It's not fun for us and frankly, we don't want more of this of this particular brand."
Robby echoes what I've been screaming about on FB since I played the demo, call this game Kingdom Hearts Gaiden.
Fine.
It would be released, people would be happy. I still wouldn't pick it up as I haven't played a KH title since 2. I would present exactly the same criticisms of the game with relation to story and gameplay but at the very least it wouldn't be a betrayal of everything that made FF games interesting to so many players.
Do gamers want games like this? Sure. And they deserve it.
But so long as they're going to slap FF on the title, they might as well make it something that resembles what established fans of the series expect.
This time they have utterly failed to deliver on the front of:
Characters
and
Battle
"The banter is great!"
Okay…they spent a lot of time recording dialogue....Uh, so did Dragon Age? Like...a long time ago?
That aside, what does banter even matter if I'm watching largely identical clones whom I can't even control? FF wasn't about playing a single role. It was about playing the roles of the characters you controlled.
This is one person's story whom other characters happen to be in. And yet they have the gall to declare 'A Final Fantasy for new fans and old'.
The fools in charge over there proved they don't know what fans appreciated the moment they made this title about one character.
And it wasn't always so, yeah? Some of those early movies clearly showed the player manipulating the other characters. When they dropped that, they lost anything resembling the series.
Demos of 15 are exactly what the name implies, a demo.
You cannot tell me, with any semblance of being honest, that the battle system from the demo is ENTIRELY different from the final build.
As a bro that grew up playing the numerous final fantasy titles and have had a wonderful time playing FFXI for many years I feel like maybe not solely because of SE and FF I am just growing used to games disappointing me. Ever since I can remember many games have fell short of either preconceived notions/ expectations/ reviews/ previews the original Fable, Halo3, recently Yoshi's World, uhhm.. Mario Golf 3ds, Mario Parties lately, soulcalibur series, the sonic series, FFXIV just to name a few that jut popped in my head.
I give SE credit at least for trying to recover from it with XIV:ARR
but nothing will fix the fact that in my eyes the then almighty SE had forgotten it's roots and became a one winged angel. Seeing them remaking FF7 is awesome though and I feel like it will have more of what "classic" final fantasy" players are looking for. Perhaps where FFXV was more pepper, FF7 Remake will be more salt? Kingdom hearts 3 the sugar on top? ;)
World of FF was a breath of fresh air and took enough from Pokémon for it to connect you with your team of monsters, and if you just let the game flow it is cheesy, but charming with a decent and uniquely customizable battle system. FFXII remake, what's not to love? HD FRAN
Sure I could probably list 100 more videogame great disappointments, sure we all probably could. Know why? Because, we care and just want video games to be as great as they deserve to be.
FFXV isn't on that list for me.
I don't know man I actually don't have that many big disappointments in gaming cause you know I inform myself. It should be telling that if I try to recall them the only 2 that come to my mind right now are FF XIII and Gothic 3. I'm sure there are 1-2 others but not that many.
Edit: Oh Diablo 3, but then that was also a point where I realized the limitations of embargo deadline driven reviews.
You cannot tell me, with any semblance of being honest, that the battle system from the demo is ENTIRELY different from the final build.
It's not completely different. It's like what Ground Zeroes was for The Phantom Pain. It gives you a basic taste or feel of some of the mechanics, but the main game is just more polished, and has many factors in battle.
Yeah… I'm gonna skip this discussion and figure out if I like XV for myself after Christmas...
I'll talk to you guys when Dissidia gets more news.
EDIT: I just want to be clear, I'm not 'anti-anyone' in this discussion. I get why people are mad or disinterested, but I also get why people are interested in this game. I have more interest in this game than XIII. I'm annoyed that this game doesn't have female character, but I'm interested in the experience of traveling by car and adventuring with it. I didn't really like the combat from the demo, but the demo is both not the final product and only showed one way of combat that can be explored in other directions.
What I'm saying is: I'm interested, and if you're not, you have every reason not to be and I'm not here to tell you you are wrong. I just don't want to participate in the discussion anymore and see things for myself instead.
It's not completely different. It's like what Ground Zeroes was for The Phantom Pain. It gives you a basic taste or feel of some of the mechanics, but the main game is just more polished, and has many factors in battle.
I'm excited for the last guardian as well ^_^
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
Yeah… I'm gonna skip this discussion and figure out if I like XV for myself after Christmas...
I'll talk to you guys when Dissidia gets more news.
I like your style.
It gives you a basic taste or feel of some of the mechanics
Yes. That's what a demo is. We know this.
And I didn't like it.
And yet, I researched it.
I saw, heard and read what others had to say about it.
I laid out the entire process.
Still going to tell me I need to buy it to play it and see myself how different it is?
Because, you offer Ground Zeroes and um, I played that and I liked it so I knew I would thoroughly enjoy what the final product would offer.
I didn't tell you to actually play it. Simply explained that yes the combat seems dull across all the marketing but it's simply better when you are actually playing it.
If the entire marketing didn't get you interested in the game, then nothing really will.
I didn't tell you to actually play it.
You were telling Kitsune they couldn't/shouldn't comment/critique without playing it. Which is why I'm jumping in to say I agree with Kitsune's assertions and, having spent time on it (for the last decade) I feel that Kitsune's points are valid regardless of playtime. That's all.
I would suggest to watch this video as to what i am getting at since it's just better written than mine, and nails all of my thoughts on the game so far.
Researching and looking into what the game has to offer isn't "ruining" it.
It's going "I like the franchise, but what I'm seeing so far doesn't interest me. Maybe if I look at more of the material they are putting out there will be something that does catch my interest."
So you watch another video, read another interview. ANd you still aren't feeling it.
So you watch some more gameplay. And nothing is clicking for you. And after having been dissapointed with the previous outings, you really need to be convinced before you're willing to part with 70$ and 100 hours to try it.
So you watch even more trailers and interviews, hoping and desperate for something, anything to strike a cord to make it exciting and interesting and worth your while. The combat, the world, the characters, the premise, anything.
And it just never comes. And this continues for three years, and demos, and bits of information coming out piecemeal. You play the demo that they release. And not only do things come forward that don't excite you at all, but elements you actively dislike and don't want to spend time on at all.
And then close to release reviews come out confirming basically everything you've judged, but you do hear people saying "yeah the first half is lackluster, but the second half and the ending are amazing!"
SO you go "well, everything I've seen so far that I don't like is about the first half I guess. If the second half is really that good, then maybe it would be worth plodding through 20 hours to get to that amazing remaining 30 hours."
Then you look and there's nothing, and you eventually give up and spend five minutes watching the end fight that people have hyped as "way better than previous boss battles" and find out it looks entirely like a quick time event where you mash a button and it's literally called "the cure for insomnia".
And at that point, yes, you can fairly go "nope, not for me."
It'd be one thing if a game stayed secret and you didn't know it existed until a week before it came out, and then you binged everything there is to know about it… but when it's part of a 10 year long development cycle that has been extremely public? It's different.
Final Fantasy as a franchise, and Square as a company, have been going in the wrong direction for a long time. They've lost trust, and they have to show off and prove to us they've got something good to offer... besides just graphics.
Abzu back in August I got sight unseen because it was from the Flower and Journey people, I didn't even need a review. Dragon Age 3 I bought gladly without having to look too closely, because the company still had my trust. (Though their next outing I may hesitate more on since they burned me a bit just because I was on the previous generation system.)
I know almost nothing about Horizon Zero Dawn releasing in February. Or Last Guardian. But I know from the couple minutes of footage I've seen that I'm totally there. Assuming the reviews are good at all, I'll be getting it without looking any further.
They shouldnt have called it FF XV in the first place and just let it be what it originally was going to be, a more action oriented spin off.
By giving it the number 15 they just raised the expectations, and even without them the game just didnt deliver for me personally.
But slapping the 15 on it just makes more money, so that is basically the only reason they did it anyway. I hope 16 won't take too long, although I can see them taking more than 5-7 years of kingdom hearts 3 and final fantasy 7 episodes development/releases downtime till actual announcement of the next numbered sequel.
To support Viz and SHUEISHAs MANGA Plus service hosting all Jump manga for FREE, WORLDWIDE and day of release, Arlong Park will now support the official release.
Official chapter discussions now start Sundays at Noon, EST.
Please do not post threads when scan sites release their version.
They shouldnt have called it FF XV in the first place and just let it be what it originally was going to be, a more action oriented spin off.
I still don't understand why you'd put a "the car breaks down and the main cast has to push it" sequence in an action game.
They shouldnt have called it FF XV in the first place
I never could understand this argument personally.
I still don't understand why you'd put a "the car breaks down and the main cast has to push it" sequence in an action game.
Do they resolve an argument or something while doing it? Classic "let's fix stuff together and be pals again" scenario.
Idk, haven't watched any vid dedicated to that part, just saw a clip of it.
FFXII is a better open-world game than FFXV. It felt like an actual world instead of grassland/desert simulator.
Oh and btw, Square needs to learn how to design side quests like the Witcher 3 or GTAV have( speaking of the variety the side stuff provides instead of doing just kill that thing and gather that item) for example, instead of doing mindless MGSV like side ops with barely any variation non stop.
They need to either vastly improve their open world design or go back to open areas.
To support Viz and SHUEISHAs MANGA Plus service hosting all Jump manga for FREE, WORLDWIDE and day of release, Arlong Park will now support the official release.
Official chapter discussions now start Sundays at Noon, EST.
Please do not post threads when scan sites release their version.
I've played for two hours and I feel the developers didn't just not "get" Final Fantasy, they don't "get" action-oriented videogames. Holding a button to perform combos is like the most counter-intuitive action ever.
Well so far I'm enjoying the game even with its flaws. I really like the combat and it's basically what's keeping me playing. There are only fetch quests in this game which is really underwhelming for a game that has been in development for so long, but I can tolerate it.
Compared to FFXIII I prefer FFXV. I could only play 5 hours of FFXIII and I'm currently 12 hours in on FFXV and plan to keep going. Does it live up to the hype? Hell no! But it's still fun IMO.
I completely understand everyone here who doesn't find it fun and feel like the series has completey deviated into something else.
If there's one thing I wish is to see a new FF title (that's not an MMO) take on the job system from FFIII. I freaking loved that.
**Oh and btw, Square needs to learn how to design side quests like the Witcher 3 or GTAV have( speaking of the variety the side stuff provides instead of doing just kill that thing and gather that item) for example, instead of doing mindless MGSV like side ops with barely any variation non stop.
They need to either vastly improve their open world design or go back to open areas.**
Throwing bunch of nonsensical, and fillerish side stuff to fill the open-world is by far the worst open-world design. Many Ubisoft games have that crappy formula like GTA5, or The Witcher. While The Witcher 3 has a lively world, it becomes extremely boring because the core mechanics, and what players are going to be doing most of the time is extremely limiting, and a chore to play. Everyone talks about The Witcher 3 side-quests, and story, but never actually focus on the core-mechanics, and what you end up doing 90% of the time.
MGSV is the complete opposite of The Witcher 3 in that aspect, and puts far more focus on the gamplay-to-gameplay moments instead of having shitty NPC's standing around to shove dialogues.
when it comes to creating unique-player-action-experiences/stories. I can talk about the subtle nature of the game that uses this particular medium to showcase fall of a character in a brilliant way, or themes aren't just presented in a tightly wrapped gift, and are scattered throughout the open-world. But just comparing The Witcher 3 to MGSV on it's simple gameplay basis, it's just not even a contest as V is far more fluent, smooth, experimental, fun, and has far more replayvalue due to the game having shit ton of tools that can be used in creative ways. Whether you want to play as stealth, action, or be creative, the game is polished enough to allow for that thus greatly differentiating every player experience from another. Compare that to whatever The Witcher 3 has to offer.The Witcher 3 is by no means a bad game, but people who pretend that The Witcher 3 is some kind of hallmark of how open-world games should be really pisses me off. The Witcher 3 did nothing original or even took the idea in new direction. Everything in the game is something that previous games have tried. It may have executed some elements better, but that still doesn't excuse the level of mediocre, limited, and dull core-gameplay.
Also on a side-note; Shadow Of The Colossus with its barren-lands>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Witcher 3.
Also on a side-note; Shadow Of The Colossus with its barren-lands>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Witcher 3.
I haven't played either The Witcher 3 or MGS5, so I'm not going to get into that discussion. But when you say something like this I know immediately that you can't be taken seriously lol. What a nonsensical comparison.
If there's one thing I wish is to see a new FF title (that's not an MMO) take on the job system from FFIII. I freaking loved that.
It's comments like this that makes me realize that everyone is playing the wrong game when looking for their "Final Fantasy" Fix. Obviously one should really be playing Bravely Default. That's Final Fantasy…and not...whatever the heck happened to Final Fantasy post FFX.
Heck, call me when Square realizes that they should be putting the BD team on the FF franchise because honestly they probably have a better grasp of what FF is than the laughing joking numbnuts that are making the FF games post FFX.
Tumblr: https://www.tumblr.com/blog/pomeranianhero
deviantart: http://pomeranianhero.deviantart.com/
It's comments like this that makes me realize that everyone is playing the wrong game when looking for their "Final Fantasy" Fix. Obviously one should really be playing Bravely Default. That's Final Fantasy…and not...whatever the heck happened to Final Fantasy post FFX.
Heck, call me when Square realizes that they should be putting the BD team on the FF franchise because honestly they probably have a better grasp of what FF is than the laughing joking numbnuts that are making the FF games post FFX.
BD certainly for the gameplay. Trails in the Sky for the feeling of going on a journey with lovable characters. :-x(sry for being annoying)
Heck even RPG factory with I am Setsuna was a more appealing game to me, and I am Setsuna wasn't the greatest. It was still somewhat impressive assuming the shoestring budget behind it, I at least felt the heart in that game.
Heck, call me when Square realizes that they should be putting the BD team on the FF franchise because honestly they probably have a better grasp of what FF is
Given certain elements of the game like the janky story elements and the tedious difficulty I wonder.
I've often wondered about that myself; seems like being supported by people who only want you there so the world can end in fire (with you going to Hell in the process) would be somewhat off-putting
3DS Friend Code 0044-2806-5284
I haven't played either The Witcher 3 or MGS5, so I'm not going to get into that discussion. But when you say something like this I know immediately that you can't be taken seriously lol. What a nonsensical comparison.
I was talking about the direction in open-world, and that empty barren-lands can still accomplish something that The Witcher 3 overly-filled open world can't.
I mean there is a reason why The Witcher 3 praise goes to its story, side-quest, and it's world but no-one praises it for what can be done in an interactive medium.
There was literally nothing to do in Shadow of Collosus except the boss fights. The tiny map of an open world didn't reward exploration, there were no clues or investigative work, there were no items or powerups (except tiny lizards) and you couldn't face the Collosi in any order… (always had to be in the exact same order) you followed a shiny light in as straight a line as you could in utter silence until you found where the giant was. No towns or ruins or bandits or anything at all to distract. Just a vast empty wasteland.
You didn't gain any new skills or abilities along the way except some extra stamina to hold onto furry bits a little longer.
7 or 8 of its boss setpieces were fantastic and truly memorable experiences, especially back on the PS2, but SotC was about the bosses, NOT the world. The atmosphere building was nice up to a point, and they got a bit of emotion out of losing the horse near the end, but overall it was dull pretty damn fast. I was incredibly tired of the map by the fifth or sixth collosus hunt. There was no real story, no character growth, nothing to mix it up except the next boss puzzle... many of which repeated.
There's a reason they threw in a boss rush after you beat the game and let you replay those parts without exploring again. Because the "exploring" part does not hold up to repeating nor is it at all rewarding.
It's comments like this that makes me realize that everyone is playing the wrong game when looking for their "Final Fantasy" Fix. Obviously one should really be playing Bravely Default. That's Final Fantasy…and not...whatever the heck happened to Final Fantasy post FFX.
Heck, call me when Square realizes that they should be putting the BD team on the FF franchise because honestly they probably have a better grasp of what FF is than the laughing joking numbnuts that are making the FF games post FFX.
Oh yeah definitely, but BD feels like a better FFIII. I want a modern take on the job system, not a another FFIII or a slighly improved version of that.
There was literally nothing to do in Shadow of Collosus except the boss fights. The tiny map of an open world didn't reward exploration, there were no clues or investigative work, there were no items or powerups (except tiny lizards) and you couldn't face the Collosi in any order… (always had to be in the exact same order) you followed a shiny light in as straight a line as you could in utter silence until you found where the giant was. No towns or ruins or bandits or anything at all to distract. Just a vast empty wasteland.
You didn't gain any new skills or abilities along the way except some extra stamina to hold onto furry bits a little longer.
7 or 8 of its boss setpieces were fantastic and truly memorable experiences, especially back on the PS2, but SotC was about the bosses, NOT the world. The atmosphere building was nice up to a point, and they got a bit of emotion out of losing the horse near the end, but overall it was dull pretty damn fast. I was incredibly tired of the map by the fifth or sixth collosus hunt. There was no real story, no character growth, nothing to mix it up except the next boss puzzle... many of which repeated.
There's a reason they threw in a boss rush after you beat the game and let you replay those parts without exploring again. Because the "exploring" part does not hold up to repeating nor is it at all rewarding.
I know SoTC was pretty weak but jesus.
Yes the game doesn't have much of exploring. Yes the game doesn't give much choice. Yes the game doesn't have much of a story. But the game is still considered to be the prime example of what can be done in this medium since it relies on huge-landscapes, barren-lands, music, interactivity etc…. to evoke emotions. Where most-games are afraid to lose the player interest, and thus end up craming as much content as they can, this game does the complete opposite.
Games like The Last Of Us, Uncharted 4,Demon/Dark Souls/Bloodborne, Journey, Abzu, etc..... are all majorly influenced by Ueda-Fumito's design-philosophy.
I was talking about the direction in open-world, and that empty barren-lands can still accomplish something that The Witcher 3 overly-filled open world can't.
Except the two games are COMPLETELY different in every way and didn't set out to accomplish any of the same things or experiences. As Robby said, SotC is basically a puzzle game involving giant boss battles. It just happens to take place in an "open world" but it's a tiny tiny place and the goal is simply to find the next target. Comparing it to a game like The Witcher 3 is kind of like saying "well I'll take Tetris and its fast-paced fun over that slow dull visual novel any day." It communicates nothing of use.
Yes the game doesn't have much of exploring. Yes the game doesn't give much choice. Yes the game doesn't have much of a story. But the game is still considered to be the prime example of what can be done in this medium since it relies on huge-landscapes, barren-lands, music, interactivity etc…. to evoke emotions. Where most-games are afraid to lose the player interest, and thus end up craming as much content as they can, this game does the complete opposite.
Games like The Last Of Us, Uncharted 4,Demon/Dark Souls/Bloodborne, Journey, Abzu, etc..... are all majorly influenced by Ueda-Fumito's design-philosophy.
Dude, there was NOTHING new or revolutionary in terms of open-world game design in SotC. I don't think it even counts as an open-world game. It pushed the boundary in a few other ways, such as spectacle and enemy scale. And maybe in terms of creating a certain atmosphere. But none of that has ANYTHING to do with the discussion at hand. Also for all that you've said you don't even understand what was unique about SotC: the solitude. The emotional aspect came from the lone, barren landscape and the player being left to contemplate his actions. And I guess a connection to Agro, you sole companion. But that's a very specific thing there that they were going for, and it's probably not what 99% of players got out of it because it's "hipster indie bullshit." Now they're trying to replicate this formula with The Last Guardian and it's going to suck ass. $1000 says you'll have to make a decision toward the end of the game to sacrifice your companion.
Except the two games are COMPLETELY different in every way and didn't set out to accomplish any of the same things or experiences. As Robby said, SotC is basically a puzzle game involving giant boss battles. It just happens to take place in an "open world" but it's a tiny tiny place and the goal is simply to find the next target. Comparing it to a game like The Witcher 3 is kind of like saying "well I'll take Tetris and its fast-paced fun over that slow dull visual novel any day." It communicates nothing of use.
Dude, there was NOTHING new or revolutionary in terms of open-world game design in SotC. I don't think it even counts as an open-world game. It pushed the boundary in a few other ways, such as spectacle and enemy scale. And maybe in terms of creating a certain atmosphere. But none of that has ANYTHING to do with the discussion at hand. Also for all that you've said you don't even understand what was unique about SotC: the solitude. The emotional aspect came from the lone, barren landscape and the player being left to contemplate his actions. And I guess a connection to Agro, you sole companion. But that's a very specific thing there that they were going for, and it's probably not what 99% of players got out of it because it's "hipster indie bullshit." Now they're trying to replicate this formula with The Last Guardian and it's going to suck ass. $1000 says you'll have to make a decision toward the end of the game to sacrifice your companion.
Did you even understand what i was saying? And what my original post was addressing?
Also i didn't say that it pushed-open-world design. The game did however push the level-design, and how they can be used to convey just like how movies use cinematography, or how comics use drawings. And that's where my other point comes in, regardless of how big world The Witcher 3 world may be and how much stuff it may have or how alive it may be, it still fails to DO anything interesting with it beyond that scripted bullshit. And that's also where my points about MGSV came in.
I simply used SoTC to demonstrate that there is a game that used the world as a natural-part of the experience instead of throwing bunch of random shit, spending so much time trying to make it "real" without there being much a point to it.
Nothing you say is going to change the fact that SotC is a useless point of comparison.
Hay guyz, NES Legend of Zelda >>>>>>>>>>>> Final Fantasy XV because open world and the protagonists use swords amirite????
nethack is a way more open game than FFXV is. guys
Set Art by Daily Rowlet
This debate just went way off the rails. Does anyone really want to read about how much better Bubble Bobble is than Mario Bros in the Square Enix thread?
Given certain elements of the game like the janky story elements and the tedious difficulty I wonder.
Still resembles FF far more than whatever happened Post FFX…warts and all.
--- Update From New Post Merge ---
This debate just went way off the rails. Does anyone really want to read about how much better Bubble Bobble is than Mario Bros in the Square Enix thread?
Ur wrong dood…clearly Kirby's Dream Land makes a waaaay better Bubble Bobble game than Mario Bros.
Tumblr: https://www.tumblr.com/blog/pomeranianhero
deviantart: http://pomeranianhero.deviantart.com/
Bubble Bobble is vastly underappreciated classic that deserved more sequels that weren't puzzle games.
Mario Bros was a terrible game, but it works okay as a minigame in Super Mario 3.
gee i wonder whatever could suggest that Robby likes Bubble Bobble
Set Art by Daily Rowlet
This is one of the best things coming out of FFXV
So I picked up a copy intended to be my free game as part of Best Buys "Buy 2 Get 1 Free" sale. I price matched my other two games down to 40 dollars so it wasnt my free game but meh.
Still didnt really pay full price for it.
I want to see what all the fuss is about the second half of the game.
This may be the most frustrating combat system I have ever experienced.
Sure, you can TWIRL the stick around to change the way you attack, but there doesn't feel like any fundamental or functional difference.
Also, Cindy is a flat out embarrassment. It doesn't help she's the ONLY female who appears in the first 90 minutes or so of the game.
[[Follow me on Twitch!]](http://twitch.tv/kitsuneinferno/)
[[Concerto di Ali: The Battle of Solocima]](showthread.php?t=33896 "Arlong Park Forums - Thread 33896") - [[Spirit Wolf]](showthread.php?t=33362 "Arlong Park Forums - Thread 33362")
[[D.U.R.I.A.N.]](showthread.php?t=32416 "Arlong Park Forums - Thread 32416") - [[Short and Sweet Writing]](showthread.php?t=30536 "Arlong Park Forums - Thread 30536")
Also, Cindy is a flat out embarrassment. It doesn't help she's the ONLY female who appears in the first 90 minutes or so of the game.
Having just checked out the first Cindy cutscene, I note that her introduction features the classic "panning camera draws attention to sexy lady's ass as she approaches" move.
I'm assuming matters don't improve from there?
The combat feels like it is designed for a more monster hunter slower pace battle system with priority on animation first, while a lot of enemies have the attacking speed of a dmc style game.
And the story was cut down from a trilogy or whatever it was planned as originally into a franchise with movies, anime ( that you are supposed to watch to actually understand the whole picture), barely any story up till the last third in the game, where a lot of characters get no development to make you actually care.
Basically what could have been solid 25 hrs of just story was cut down to 7 and put into more than 50 hours of a mmo fetch side quest template.
Edit:
Since I am lazy to actually write this stuff out myself
, heres a quote from GAF:
Tabata hasn't directed a great game. I don't think he should be given another mainline title. Don't get me wrong, he hasn't directed a bad game either. Everything he's made has been decent but not up to the standard expected from the main series. He has no eye for delivering narrative (there is a good story in XV waiting to be told), his titles lack polish and the gameplay is messy. He's kind of the opposite of Toriyama. This game falls short in the opposite ways to XIII. XIII had an atrocious story told competently (at least compared to XV), great polish, smooth battle system and basically nothing else.
Oh and Tabata has chapter 13. I've been trying to think of any section in a mainline FF that's worse than that and I still haven't. Truly bad stamp to have on your track record.
Also, Cindy is a flat out embarrassment. It doesn't help she's the ONLY female who appears in the first 90 minutes or so of the game.
THIS. What bothers me the most is how the shadows on her cleavage are baked on the model's texture. So it doesn't matter the positioning of the world's lighting that cleavage will always be marked there in her chest and it will forever be visible because boobs.
I just discovered a youtube video called "Adamantoise: the 1 hour boss"
What
Why. Why would you do this again? Is that supposed to be fun? Like, if you get a kick out of fights like these then by all means, but it completely baffles me.
