|
gigglefeimer posted:To be fair, the other FFs that are praised for having good job systems/gameplay (5 and Tactics) don't require you to engage with 90% of their mechanics either. It's just the case with FF games that you have to be self-motivated. I remember very little of V but I enjoyed III's Job System. It was a much harder game than X-2 at least.
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2017 15:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 22:36 |
|
|
Honestly the magic of Final Fantasys combats systems is that the games are structured in a way that they can easily hide the glaring faults and make it work anyway, unlike a good number of games I could name that end up throwing theirs front and center. If anything the only unforgivable sin is that people moving from FF to other JRPGs take their FF habits with them, which tend to not translate well into most other popular series.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2017 16:22
|
|
|
FFXV has visually impressive combat and it feels really good at times. Then you sort of realize that you aren't really challenged for the majority of the game. What I'm really trying to say that Nioh is going to own and it cannot come any sooner.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2017 18:13
|
|
|
Tae posted:I don't think Nomura has really worked on Kingdom Hearts for years now. Didn't they Tabata him off of the project and gave him a name-only position? He's in charge of the broad creative vision of the series while other people work hands-on on the games themselves. It's not unusual for the company to have a director/producer in charge of the overarching concept for the game while the minute to minute gameplay systems or dialogue are handled by other people. For Kingdom Hearts 3, Nomura is in charge of the creative direction for the game while Tai Yasue is the co-director who works on game on a day-to-day basis. As an example of how this incredibly productive arrangement plays out: quote:Legendary Square Enix designer Tetsuya Nomura recently stepped down as director of Square Enix's Final Fantasy 15 to focus on Kingdom Hearts 3. http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014-12-04-kingdom-hearts-3-dev-discusses-with-switch-from-luminous-to-unreal-engine-4
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2017 20:51
|
|
|
So wait, Nomura actually has that job we all wanted as kids? He's the "idea guy"?
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2017 21:03
|
|
|
*crawls from under his rock* So, uh, how did FF15 turn out? Worth the money?
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2017 21:10
|
|
|
CeallaSo posted:So wait, Nomura actually has that job we all wanted as kids? He's the "idea guy"? Pretty sweet deal for a guy who hasn't had a good idea for 20 years.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2017 21:38
|
|
|
Malek Deneith posted:*crawls from under his rock* It's the worst Final Fantasy
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2017 21:39
|
|
|
CeallaSo posted:So wait, Nomura actually has that job we all wanted as kids? He's the "idea guy"? What's good with being the ideas guy when the other director is in charge of implementing, changing, or vetoing the idea for the final game?
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2017 22:33
|
|
|
Sunning posted:What's good with being the ideas guy when the other director is in charge of implementing, changing, or vetoing the idea for the final game? You still get paid.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2017 22:34
|
|
|
Sunning posted:What's good with being the ideas guy when the other director is in charge of implementing, changing, or vetoing the idea for the final game? nomura is making bank dude, don't pretend he isn't getting a sweet deal
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2017 22:39
|
|
|
WaltherFeng posted:FFXV has visually impressive combat and it feels really good at times. I have never played a non-From-Software / non-SMT JRPG that was difficult until you reach the optional content near the end of the game except parts of the FF3 and FF4 remakes. JRPGs always seem so incredibly reluctant to throw much difficulty at you until you've gone through endless hours of tedious easy combat. Hell most JRPGs take a dozen hours just to get all the mechanics in. We picked up the FFX remaster and after FFXV this game is so drat boring. We're a couple hours in and you can just mash auto attack until combat goes away and even doing that takes forever. So I'm waiting for the story to slowly dribble in and for the game to decide to give me enough characters and combat options to make things interesting. The last quarter of FFXV and the ending kinda soured me on the game but playing FFX is making me like it a lot more. I forgot how stale JRPG conventions had gotten by the PS2 era and at least XV throws some interesting combat at you pretty quickly and trusts the player enough to give them all the mechanics. A bog standard JRPG would've made you play as just Noct solo for 5 hours to make sure you understood dodging and parrying before allowing you to start trying link strikes and poo poo which would slowly be added over the next dozen hours.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2017 22:57
|
|
|
What bog standard JRPGs do you have in mind?
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2017 22:59
|
|
|
CeallaSo posted:So wait, Nomura actually has that job we all wanted as kids? He's the "idea guy"? He's actually supposedly directing ff7r in a more hands on way, although didn't know this until he was doing the job for a couple weeks and was curious why people were asking him so much about it. Attitude Indicator posted:It's the worst Final Fantasy With the possible exception of I-XIV
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2017 23:50
|
|
|
Terper posted:What bog standard JRPGs do you have in mind? FF 13
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 02:34
|
|
|
I mean it's true that you CAN certainly get through the combat in most parts of FFXV by just holding auto-attack, but it doesn't mean you'll get through it well. it's kinda like FFXIII where you could make every battle a boring slog and get 1-star ratings or you could actually play it the way you're supposed to and get good scores, and a bunch of people just played it the first way and didn't have fun. half the fun of FFXV is warping around and backstabbing and using the techniques and stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 04:09
|
|
|
how long does the ffxv moogle event run for and is it cool? i havent played in a while but dont wanna miss it
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 04:51
|
|
|
I finished VI for the first time this afternoon (also the first Final Fantasy I've ever played), and I'm kinda bummed to see it go. My dudes were so swole they completely steamrolled the last dungeon and Kefka too. Dual-casting Ultima with the Gem Box was fun. I really liked how open-ended the World of Ruin was, you could kinda see as much or as little as you wanted. I have IX, I might try that next. I looked at V but it seemed like a bit of a downgrade compared to VI. Then again VI is probably the best looking SNES games I've ever played.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 05:26
|
|
|
panascope posted:I finished VI for the first time this afternoon (also the first Final Fantasy I've ever played), and I'm kinda bummed to see it go. My dudes were so swole they completely steamrolled the last dungeon and Kefka too. Dual-casting Ultima with the Gem Box was fun. I really liked how open-ended the World of Ruin was, you could kinda see as much or as little as you wanted. Visually V is downgrade from VI, but most will agree that the core gameplay is better. Don't get me wrong, I love VI, but V is a fantastic game and you shouldn't discount it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 05:33
|
|
|
morallyobjected posted:I mean it's true that you CAN certainly get through the combat in most parts of FFXV by just holding auto-attack, but it doesn't mean you'll get through it well. it's kinda like FFXIII where you could make every battle a boring slog and get 1-star ratings or you could actually play it the way you're supposed to and get good scores, and a bunch of people just played it the first way and didn't have fun. half the fun of FFXV is warping around and backstabbing and using the techniques and stuff. See also: Dark Knight/Dark Knight/Alchemist combo in X-2 for an inefficient but brain-dead method to plod your way through the game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 05:43
|
|
|
panascope posted:I have IX, I might try that next. I looked at V but it seemed like a bit of a downgrade compared to VI. Then again VI is probably the best looking SNES games I've ever played. You really can't go wrong here. Aside from not getting around to playing V or IX, of course.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 05:46
|
|
|
gigglefeimer posted:See also: Dark Knight/Dark Knight/Alchemist combo in X-2 for an inefficient but brain-dead method to plod your way through the game. Might I recommend the Tipping Forties LP of X-2? They beat the game with that exact strategy. They did switch in Berserker sometimes I guess? morallyobjected posted:I mean it's true that you CAN certainly get through the combat in most parts of FFXV by just holding auto-attack, but it doesn't mean you'll get through it well. it's kinda like FFXIII where you could make every battle a boring slog and get 1-star ratings or you could actually play it the way you're supposed to and get good scores, and a bunch of people just played it the first way and didn't have fun. half the fun of FFXV is warping around and backstabbing and using the techniques and stuff. Why does the game punish you for wanting to be cautious? I mean, what's wrong with being defensive and healing a lot? That was my big problem with XIII during my first run. It's a boss fight, I want to be defensive and heal at every opportunity to be safe. But that makes my time poo poo and the game is mocking me and I don't like it. There should never be a wrong way to play a video game, at least not an RPG.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 06:55
|
|
|
I say this only half-facetiously, but have you considered that if you were more aggressive (or made better use of buffs) that you wouldn't have to stop and heal at every opportunity? And maybe you're already doing that, in which case the question becomes "Why are you looking at the battle system that works best when you're playing as fast as possible, and asking 'But what if I want to play slowly?'" Like...you can. There is literally nothing stopping you from playing it as slowly and safely as possible until you start pushing 20 minute per fight territory (which is well beyond "cautious" territory and into "You are either fundamentally misunderstanding something about this boss or willfully ignoring it").
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 07:04
|
|
|
NikkolasKing posted:Why does the game punish you for wanting to be cautious? I mean, what's wrong with being defensive and healing a lot? The major problem is that caution rarely makes for engaging gameplay and encouraging it encourages players to take paths that, more or less, tend to create slog experiences. Most games are now trending towards discouraging slow-and-steady gameplay and instead focusing on burst healing or minimizing healing time, instead encouraging the player not not NEED to heal by figuring out ways to make combat faster. Rather than healing being the thing that undoes damage it is treated like another form of damage mitigation. NikkolasKing posted:There should never be a wrong way to play a video game, at least not an RPG. Yes, there should. Sorry if you don't like it but gameplay design can not equally support every playstyle. It isn't possible. Every RPG on the market has to figure out what they want to focus their players on and people have discovered that almost universally players respond much more positively to fast-paced combat systems with a focus on quick battles and heavy aggressive combat. Defensive-oriented gameplay in RPGs tends to garner extremely negative responses That is why most modern RPGs either trend towards high damage numbers (so that healing is outpaced), have mechanical benefits for choosing to minimize defensive time, or institute some form of gradual decay which limits healing effectiveness. (Like FFXV's permanent HP damage.) While having healing and support abilities is an important part of game design an issue with them removing risk is that it makes designing fights extremely hard. By minimizing defensive and healing item in favor of buffs/debuffs/burst heals/ect you can create faster and more engaging fights that have all the same highs but fewer lows. "Why can't you offer choices?" runs into the twin risk of it being hard to design fights that are equally fun for both combat methods and that if you offer players a safe low-risk but unfun opportunity they will take it and be unhappy with it. Designers are obligated to force players to have fun, as silly as that might sound, and part of that is designing your game so players can't fall back to a boring-but-safe method. ImpAtom fucked around with this message at 07:20 on Jan 30, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 07:07
|
|
|
Artix posted:I say this only half-facetiously, but have you considered that if you were more aggressive (or made better use of buffs) that you wouldn't have to stop and heal at every opportunity? And maybe you're already doing that, in which case the question becomes "Why are you looking at the battle system that works best when you're playing as fast as possible, and asking 'But what if I want to play slowly?'" Like...you can. There is literally nothing stopping you from playing it as slowly and safely as possible until you start pushing 20 minute per fight territory (which is well beyond "cautious" territory and into "You are either fundamentally misunderstanding something about this boss or willfully ignoring it"). As I recall, you need to win fights quickly in order to replenish TP and get items and stuff. It's pretty essential. And in my first run of the game I was woefully incompetent in the use of Saboteur which is why I needed to heal a lot. ImpAtom posted:Yes, there should. Sorry if you don't like it but gameplay design can not equally support every playstyle. It isn't possible. Every RPG on the market has to figure out what they want to focus their players on and people have discovered that almost universally players respond much more positively to fast-paced combat systems with a focus on quick battles and heavy aggressive combat. Defensive-oriented gameplay in RPGs tends to garner extremely negative responses I never played it but, in spite of the party line that "turn-based combat is old and boring" didn't Bravely Default do really well? There's nothing wrong with "slow combat." Twitch gameplay like XIII's is not more strategic and it's certainly not more fun. (XIII does involve a bit more strategy but it's not because of the twitchiness)
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 07:23
|
|
|
NikkolasKing posted:There should never be a wrong way to play a video game, at least not an RPG. i completely and honestly wish more games would be like 13 and downgrade you for playing the game inefficiently
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 07:24
|
|
|
NikkolasKing posted:I never played it but, in spite of the party line that "turn-based combat is old and boring" didn't Bravely Default do really well? Turn-based combat has nothing to do with what you're talking about. Bravely Default is exactly the opposite inf act, it has a heavy aggression-based playstyle where you figure out ways to mitigate damage in order to pump out as much damage as possible. Like a major part of BD is that you can play defensive to built up extra turns to act but the optimal builds are about figuring out ways to minimize your downtime so you can act as much as possible. There are 'safe' builds too but they are discouraged by the game's hardest boss fights in favor of ones which gain extra actions and spend as little time on downtime as possible because otherwise the enemies will overwhelm you. That said BD does have a couple of builds which are literally "put game down, walk away, return to a win" but nobody actually thinks those are fun builds and enjoys using them beyond the fun of discovering a game-breaker, and they were heavily nerfed in the sequel. ImpAtom fucked around with this message at 07:28 on Jan 30, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 07:24
|
|
|
NikkolasKing posted:Might I recommend the Tipping Forties LP of X-2? They beat the game with that exact strategy. They did switch in Berserker sometimes I guess? Yeah, no thanks. Like I said, that strategy works, but it's incredibly boring, inefficient, and doesn't even work that well unless you already have pretty high levels to back it up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 07:29
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:Turn-based combat has nothing to do with what you're talking about. Bravely Default is exactly the opposite inf act, it has a heavy aggression-based playstyle where you figure out ways to mitigate damage in order to pump out as much damage as possible. Well I mean, any good RPG will offer the ability to mitigate damage. I didn't mean you should just take every blow on the chin and then heal constantly. Buffs and debuffs exist for a reason. Since it's the most fun I've had playing a JRPG in recent memory, something like SMT Nocturne seems good. Start a fight amping yourself up then go crazy on the boss and heal/rebuff when necessary. All I was talking about earlier was the rating system. That poo poo belongs in action games and I don't like action games. I mean, imagine if it existed in Final Fantasy VIII. How many posters on here have nostalgically mentioned they went through VIII spamming GF's? We all know how inefficient that is and that you can trivialize every boss in a fraction of the time with plain old physical attacks. But does that mean they should have been punished by the game for "doing it wrong?" gigglefeimer posted:Yeah, no thanks. Like I said, that strategy works, but it's incredibly boring, inefficient, and doesn't even work that well unless you already have pretty high levels to back it up. They were actually pretty low level, barely beat Vegnagun even. It was hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 07:37
|
|
|
The White Dragon posted:Yup, it affects summon delay time. Summoning anything at all (usually negatively) influences your affinity with other summons, so if you use LuvLuvGs (lol good luck i think it takes 50 to take one from 0 to max) to get your affinity to 1000 with everything, the next time you cast a summon, a good chunk of the roster will drop to 999 or lower.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 07:37
|
|
|
NikkolasKing posted:All I was talking about earlier was the rating system. That poo poo belongs in action games and I don't like action games. Why does it belong in action games and not RPGs? NikkolasKing posted:I mean, imagine if it existed in Final Fantasy VIII. How many posters on here have nostalgically mentioned they went through VIII spamming GF's? We all know how inefficient that is and that you can trivialize every boss in a fraction of the time with plain old physical attacks. But does that mean they should have been punished by the game for "doing it wrong?" Yes? You're picking one of the examples of the most easily broken and poorly designed FF games out there, one which is simultaneously so easy that it is one-button presses and so badly designed players can get to the final dungeon without understanding gameplay mechanics and get stuck. All games punish you for doing it wrong. That is what video games are. They teach you how to play the game and encourage you to follow the rules the game lays down. That doesn't mean you have to follow those rules but if you don't then the game offers soft or hard punishments for doing so.You mention Nocturne? Nocturne will punish you for trying, for example, to keep using your favorite demons instead of constantly swapping in new ones with worse stats and more vulnerable weaknesses. That is part of how the game is designed. It cuts down on player freedom but there is a point where freedom isn't the end goal of a designer. ImpAtom fucked around with this message at 07:48 on Jan 30, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 07:41
|
|
|
NikkolasKing posted:Well I mean, any good RPG will offer the ability to mitigate damage. I didn't mean you should just take every blow on the chin and then heal constantly. Buffs and debuffs exist for a reason. Since it's the most fun I've had playing a JRPG in recent memory, something like SMT Nocturne seems good. Start a fight amping yourself up then go crazy on the boss and heal/rebuff when necessary. I'm actually extremely confused by this paragraph, because the way to get good ratings in FFXIII is literally this.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 07:45
|
|
|
DACK FAYDEN posted:The best thing about this post is that it could be one hundred percent fake and I'd never know, because the only question I was left with after reading it was "wait, you can actually summon GFs in 8 and not just use them for abilities?" Its a really bad idea because most kids who did that coasted on summon damage without engaing the junction system until the summons cant keep up in damage or tank enough damage and then theyre utterly hosed. Related to BD, and especially in the sequel, if you arent using your turns to use staggeringly overwhelming force on your foes you will die frequently or have a slog like time with the game. The old JRPG paradigm of "one character heals every turn to undo all the damage you took" is passe and most games realize that you can design much better encounters when players need to optimize to dish out damage and react to bursts versus sustaining through damage in attrition races.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 07:45
|
|
|
Does XIII's rating system actually do anything or does it just clue you into whether you're playing efficiently or not?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 07:48
|
|
|
Motto posted:Does XIII's rating system actually do anything or does it just clue you into whether you're playing efficiently or not? It influences drop rates. At high scores you get better drop rates. At low scores it drops handicap items.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 07:50
|
|
|
Its too bad crafting and item purchases are a sick, sad joke in FFXIII or those rewards may have meant something.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 07:54
|
|
|
NikkolasKing posted:All I was talking about earlier was the rating system. That poo poo belongs in action games and I don't like action games. you aren't punished for low ratings in any of these games other than in XIII you won't have a chance at the better item drops, I think (which you don't even need for standard play anyway). XV's ratings mean literally nothing, as far as I can tell, except there's some DLC (?) accessory that gives you AP boosts for getting A+. otherwise you can just do what I do and ignore the ratings. if there had been some kind of rating system in VIII, maybe people would have tried to figure out a different way than summon spam, which is all kinds of tedious. yes, you can play games in sub-optimal ways but the rating systems in XIII and XV are basically just there to let you know "hey, there's no real in-game effect, but we just want to tell you that you should really look for a different way to do things"--they aren't punishments in any real sense. if someone wants to play XIII by being cautious and healing every five seconds to outlast enemies, then fine. but that someone doesn't also then get to complain about XIII being slow and boring for that reason when the game is actively trying to encourage you to play it differently. e: I'm just late I guess
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 07:56
|
|
|
NikkolasKing posted:They were actually pretty low level, barely beat Vegnagun even. It was hilarious. Jesus, they had alright levels (high 30's) and it took fifteen minutes to beat just Vegnagun's Head.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 07:59
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:Why does it belong in action games and not RPGs? Because that's what action games fans want. They want to do super special combos and get their SSS Rank in Style. It's not just about winning fights, it's how you win them. I don't care how I win fights in RPGs as long as everyone is alive to get EXP. Expediency is preferred but I don't want rankings for time. Some RPG boss fights take 30+ minute and people enjoy it. quote:Yes? You're picking one of the examples of the most easily broken and poorly designed FF games out there, one which is simultaneously so easy that it is one-button presses and so badly designed players can get to the final dungeon without understanding gameplay mechanics and get stuck. Well I do agree here. a crisp refreshing Moxie posted:I'm actually extremely confused by this paragraph, because the way to get good ratings in FFXIII is literally this. Yeah but XIII is all about twitch gameplay. That makes all the difference. In contrast, I could sit back and plot my next move in Nocturne forever. NikkolasKing fucked around with this message at 09:08 on Jan 30, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 09:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 22:36 |
|
|
ImpAtom posted:Yes, there should. Sorry if you don't like it but gameplay design can not equally support every playstyle. It isn't possible. Every RPG on the market has to figure out what they want to focus their players on and people have discovered that almost universally players respond much more positively to fast-paced combat systems with a focus on quick battles and heavy aggressive combat. Defensive-oriented gameplay in RPGs tends to garner extremely negative responses I'd actually like to hear your non-Final Fantasy examples, because you seem to be implicitly talking about western RPGs (which I've ollie'd out of over time) and forgetting that stuff like Shin Megami Tensei and Pokemon still exist. Plus they're still straight turn-based, rather than the action-RPG hybrid bent that most of the genre's gone for as of late (which I never liked). I'm not saying you're wrong, I'd just like to see all the cards on the table so we can see all the tactics that work to varying degrees. Shin Megami Tensei's way of keeping the pace up in-combat has generally been the Press Turn/1 More/All-Out Attack/etc. systems that incentivize very quickly identifying and hitting your opponent's weakness, so you can get more turns to set up or wail on them even harder. Doing that effectively requires having a wide selection of active demons/Personas to ensure you can hit those varying weak points, but that runs up against the great factor of compromise; it's not feasible to have a perfect setup in a Megaten game (it is possible, it's just not fun to make), and given your constantly shifting repertoire, that means that you've always got some sort of weakness exposed that's shifting over time. So on top of keeping the assault up, you have to remain aware that sometimes you're gonna have to go through a dungeon and just have no meaningful electricity resistance. And of course, Pokemon is just an absurdly colorful and complex form of Rock-Paper-Scissors, and while over time it's really streamlined away from clunky and cumbersome design decisions and generally in single-player content incentivizes quick dispatching of your enemies (because you'll be fighting a lot of them), it's worth noting that they do let you turtle. Quite well, in fact, there's some really good Pokemon that are only good at outlasting your opponent. They'll even have trainers use it themselves sometimes; one of Sun/Moon's endgame trainers has a Clefable that's mostly devastating not because it hits hard, but because it just won't loving die. Cleretic fucked around with this message at 09:23 on Jan 30, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 09:21
|
|
