Oh boohoo people can't criticize a flawed game because blind fanboys say so! More people need to criticize FFXIII so FFXV will return to its roots as well introduce new exciting gameplay.
Final Fantasy XIII
Game » consists of 17 releases. Released Mar 09, 2010
This entry into the Final Fantasy universe is set in the worlds of Pulse and Cocoon. Players take control of multiple characters who are caught in a war between these worlds.
The Review For Final Fantasy XIII
Except...some people are driven by things besides nostalgia and don't want to see games return to dated gameplay, aka their 'roots'. It's not blind fanboyism to like something that someone else dislikes. You can criticize the game just fine, it's just that most of these criticisms are of the genre, not the game itself. Which means it just isn't your genre. I hate WRPGs for instance, but I appreciate that games like ME2 and DA are perfectly good games...just not for me.
There are people raising some actual criticisms of the game that are just fine, I thought Adam's review was pretty fair overall, except a couple bits at the beginning.
I guess we just have different tastes, FFX was one of my favourites (after 6 and 8) and I thought XII was a massive step back for the franchise with an extremely weak story and characters. I've played quite a few WRPGs (Most of the bioware games, quite a few bethesda games), and I've disliked all of them because they just aren't what I am looking for. They offer a lot of customization but in the process sacrifice characters and narrative structure. Exploration is an appeal I've never seen, I want to progress the story and not run around a city for no apparent reason, it's the same reason I hate games like GTA (and other open-world games) I prefer a structure narrative experience in my games and just don't see the point of doing random stuff just because I can. That's why my favourite game of all time remains Xenogears, even though the gameplay wasn't exceptional. The narrative of that game is something I've never found replicated, even in my favourite novels and movies.
I think XIII takes a move forward by streamlining the experience and removing a lot of the filler that past JRPGs have been known for. That's why I feel we just have genre differences, I prefer the streamlining and you see it as dumbing down.
Not to derail the thread too much :P. Well, I'll agree with you on 6 and Tactics, both are amazing games and FFT is actually my favourite FF, I just don't include it in mainline FF discussion. I find that XII's characters were, with the exception of Balthier, lacking in any real motivation. Especially Vaan and Penelo just kinda seemed to be...there for no real reason. The only character that really mattered to the story was Ashe, and even she seemed pretty bland and two-dimensional.
As far as Bioware games, while I give you that Mass Effect's story structure was pretty decent (the only bioware game I really liked much) the others really aren't. If you think Dragon Age had a good or innovative story, you've never read a fantasy novel in your life, cause it was basically just a rehash of every fantasy novel ever made. I guess we agree on Bethesda though (which is a shame, cause I desperately wanted to like Fallout 3, the setting and the like were fantastic...but it just didn't deliver for me with story).
Yeah, GTA isn't an RPG, but it was just an example that I don't like open-world games very much, the 'freedom' you get isn't something I ever want anything to do with. I'd prefer a linear game 9/10 over an open world game, with I think inFamous being one of the very few I actually enjoyed.
As far as the hand-holding bit, it's not that FFXIII is BAD for the first 20 hrs, it's just slow, chapter 7 was actually my favourite chapter of the game by far, and comes well before the part everyone says is the 'best part'. I think the characters in XIII are actually what holds it up for me though. Probably the best cast of characters in an RPG, especially Sazh (who is by far the most believable video game character I've come across, period. He actually acts like you'd expect a person to act in those situations.) The fact that the first parts of the game are spent with the characters struggling to find out why they are doing what they are doing, and not just banding together to save the world is really fantastic in my opinion.
We just agree to disagree I suppose, but I always like some friendly debate on the subject.
So what is it about JRPGs that JRPG fans love so much? Turn-based battles with predetermined attack animations, as opposed to active battling where one has to control the attack? Random battles, as opposed to seeing all of the enemies ahead of time? Overworld maps? What exactly is a JRPG these days anyway? Just an RPG made by Japanese people? This is not really clear to me.
I mean I loved FF6...one of my favorite games of all time. But if someone tried to pass that game off today, even with updated graphics, I'd slap them in the side of their head and tell them to try again. I think it's fine to ask a game to do something new and/or more engaging. The whole "bu-bu-bu-but you just don't like JRPGs!!" argument baffles me, frankly.
What I'm digging is the combat system an how it feels like a real time combat system. Like I'm actual hitting that foe when I press the command button sense the the ATB bar feels up so fast as well how characters move about an get behind foes an the fact that you can rotate the camera. It's kinda of a fusion of FF10 + FF12 combat systems the more I think about it.
A JRPG tends to sacrifice player choice for deeper narrative structure. A very very rough example is a choose your own adventure book (That'd be the WRPG) vs a novel (JRPG). You have no real choice in how the novel turns out, but as a result the author is able to craft a deeper story. Characteristics of a WRPG include things like open environments, exploration, player choice, and heavy amounts of customization. Characteristics of JRPGs tend to include more focus on character/story development, yet still possessing elements of RPGs such as levelling up (in some sense of the phrase) or character growth in that fashion. They tend to come in two flavours of either more cinematic (most Square games, think Final Fantasy) or more anime-ish (think GUST games like Ar Tonelico or even some of the Tales games). The animeish ones tend to have more a niche audience, especially lately.
In a WRPG for example, very often your main character is some extension of yourself, more of an avatar of you the player. You are often able to customize their gender/behaviours etc. The upside to this from a WRPG-player's point of view is it lets you put 'yourself' in the game and is more immersive. The downside to this from a JRPG-point of view is that the character cannot be directly written into a large narrative story, since the character has no personality prior to what you assign for them.
Just two different genres that I feel appeal to very different gamers, and whether you prefer the narrative or the customization more. Neither is a wrong choice, by any means.
It really frustrates me that people feel the need to bash this game with statements like "Well maybe if we we whine about the linearity flaws then the next one will be better" . When in actual fact, longtime fans of Japanese Role Playing Game design methodology will be delighted by the linearity and clear narrative path and flow. I'm not against people who have a different opinion but it's really frustrating to see that most posters who complain here are simply doing so because it doesn't cater to there specific tastes, when the genre of the game itself and it's very design principles NEVER catered to their "open world and choice" needs.
" It really frustrates me that people feel the need to bash this game with statements like "Well maybe if we we whine about the linearity flaws then the next one will be better" . When in actual fact, longtime fans of Japanese Role Playing Game design methodology will be delighted by the linearity and clear narrative path and flow. I'm not against people who have a different opinion but it's really frustrating to see that most posters who complain here are simply doing so because it doesn't cater to there specific tastes, when the genre of the game itself and it's very design principles NEVER catered to their "open world and choice" needs. "This. People seem to be confusing "not the game I wanted" with "bad game."
Final Fantasy has never done towns particularly well. They were really just smoke and mirrors that hid the linearity of previous games. XIII draws back the curtain on how it's structured more and that's why people are taking notice. There are several legitimate issues with XIII, but I don't consider linearity one of them.
I thought it was great right from the beginning which means that it only gets better on the further you go.
Just beat this game, and I have to say; it's amazing. I have it both on the PS3 and 360 that's how much I like it.
And personally, I like a linear game. I'm tired, in my limited time to play games these days, of having to wonder around figuring out what to do next or spend half my time doing pointless travel. Just point me where to go and let me get into the action.
Same, I have two copies as well (japanese ps3 and US ps3) and I do appreciate the linear quality myself. I've always hated open worlds and exploring, because it always seems like exploring for the sake of exploring. Like, sure you can go to point C before point B...but there's no real point to do that, cause you won't be able to do anything.
FF XIII is a good game. The fact that the game starts out slow in level progression and free roaming doesnt diminish the overall quality of the game. Although, I can see how many would be turned off by the large time commitment, and to that point, simply dont play the game. I dont necessarily think that the beginning portions of this game are drastically more linear than FF X. I was unsure about the battle system at first but once you get to more challenging battles, switching paradigms is addictive and fun. I dont know, I guess it just boils down to how much you enjoy the Final Fantasy brand, I would be curios to hear from people who have never played a Final Fantasy game before what their imppresions are. To me, I will always hold FF VI as the best game in the franchise, and im pretty sure that never going to change. One thing you can always point to in a FF game is that you are getting your moneys worth, if you like the content. You are looking at about 70 hours of gameplay here and thats alot considering the production cost of modern games.
" @Bobby_The_Great: Same, I have two copies as well (japanese ps3 and US ps3) and I do appreciate the linear quality myself. I've always hated open worlds and exploring, because it always seems like exploring for the sake of exploring. Like, sure you can go to point C before point B...but there's no real point to do that, cause you won't be able to do anything. "Which is why I appreciated Fallout 3 quite a bit, don't get me wrong that game had its fair share of problems (WHY I GET STUCK IN GROUND AS A MELEE CHAR EVERY TIME I USE VATS?!!?!?!?) but exploring in that game took the opposite approach. In most cases you could totally go to point c before point b and do stuff that might even make going to point b useless. However, you have to sacrifice a lot of story related stuff to have a game that open which is why I wouldn't want every RPG to offer that level of exploration. But both are good every now and then.
I won't lie, Fallout 3, Mass Effect 2 and Dragon Age are great open-ended games.
But, I'm liking FFXIII solely on its tight-focused story and gameplay. I like that if I only have 30 minutes to an hour, I can get some progress done in FFXIII as opposed to spending that time having to walk around to get to my next destination.
" @Kr3lian: A JRPG tends to sacrifice player choice for deeper narrative structure. A very very rough example is a choose your own adventure book (That'd be the WRPG) vs a novel (JRPG). You have no real choice in how the novel turns out, but as a result the author is able to craft a deeper story. Characteristics of a WRPG include things like open environments, exploration, player choice, and heavy amounts of customization. Characteristics of JRPGs tend to include more focus on character/story development, yet still possessing elements of RPGs such as levelling up (in some sense of the phrase) or character growth in that fashion. They tend to come in two flavours of either more cinematic (most Square games, think Final Fantasy) or more anime-ish (think GUST games like Ar Tonelico or even some of the Tales games). The animeish ones tend to have more a niche audience, especially lately. In a WRPG for example, very often your main character is some extension of yourself, more of an avatar of you the player. You are often able to customize their gender/behaviours etc. The upside to this from a WRPG-player's point of view is it lets you put 'yourself' in the game and is more immersive. The downside to this from a JRPG-point of view is that the character cannot be directly written into a large narrative story, since the character has no personality prior to what you assign for them. Just two different genres that I feel appeal to very different gamers, and whether you prefer the narrative or the customization more. Neither is a wrong choice, by any means. "So how does that explain a game like Mass Effect 2?
I actually hated Fallout 3 and Dragon Age both (I reviewed Dragon Age well actually when I wrote a review of it, I just absolutely hated it personally). Both for very similar reasons, I found the overall narrative suffered terribly because of the open structure. Dragon Age had nice characters, but the most generic fantasy story I've ever laid eyes on.
Haven't played ME2 cause the copy of ME1 I was playing through just decided to stop working (PC gaming, yay -.-;;;) so I never finished it, but I was alright with ME1 as a rare exception to my dislike of WRPGs. So I think that's one reason I prefer a strong linear component, I just really dislike WRPGs and other open world style games. Just not my taste.
@tranquilchaos: Not that I've played it, but I'm under the impression that it is a shooter with RPG elements? I don't see how it doesn't fit into my WRPG definition, it's just a WRPG/Shooter hybrid. Albeit a bit linear for a WRPG, which probably makes it a bit better storyline wise in my estimation, were I to play it.
Oblivion is great, though dated by now, I would assume. It does have the VAST open world as opposed to Dragon Age of Mass Effect worlds.
Please Log In to post.
This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:
Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.Comment and Save
Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.
Log in to comment