egg's forum posts

#1 Posted by egg (1450 posts) -
@karkarov said:

I would think the fact that Jeff (a guy who really doesn't seem to like RPG's in general much less JRPG's) actually ended up liking Persona 4 and thinking it was okay says a lot about how good a game it is. That said. No. It doesn't have random encounters. At all.

I would probably like the game too, but it is on intellectual grounds that I object to playing the game.

Here's the way I see it, random encounters are the result of causality. But if games aren't meant be good, (and obviously they aren't or else there wouldnt be randomly triggered encounters) and instead are merely the result of causality, then why bother playing games? They are just a waste product. It creates an existentialist crisis for me as a player/consumer. Admiring Persona 3 would be like admiring a rock.

#2 Edited by egg (1450 posts) -

@believer258 said:

@egg: The solution is to research the games you want (as in, watch videos of them on Youtube, Google information about them, ask if the JRPG's you are interested in have random encounters) and if they have random encounters, don't buy them. You treat them as something malicious, but they aren't. If you don't like games involving random encounters, do not buy them. It's that simple. If you like the general JRPG aesthetic so much that you must play them, then you'll have to put up with random encounters in a lot of the genre's most celebrated games. If it isn't worth putting up with random encounters for the other parts of JRPG's that you like, then unfortunately the genre isn't for you and you'll have to find something else to do with your time.

Because this is off-topic, I've spoiled the next part of my post. It's just a bunch of suggestions for JRPG's that do something different with this whole random encounter mess that you dislike so much. There are places to look for JRPG's that do not put you in random encounters.

Just out of curiosity, have you played Chrono Trigger and Cross and Final Fantasy XII? None of them have random encounters, though in the case of Cross you still have to transition to some battle screen to fight enemies. In FFXII's case, there is no transition whatsoever and they are on the field. FFXIII also has no random encounters but that game is divisive for good reasons.

Bravely Default allows you to turn random encounters completely off whenever you want. You're still going to have to fight them, as you need to level up, but if you just want to say "fuck it, I want to look around this dungeon without fighting anything", you can do that. Segregate your fighting and your exploring. When playing this game, I usually listen to my own music while fighting through a dungeon, then turn off random encounters and go back through it for anything I might have missed - treasure, secrets, and so on. I don't know if you find that acceptable or not.

Like Chrono Cross, Radiant Historia represents its encounters with an enemy onscreen that you touch. Tales of Symphonia also does this. As I've mentioned before, Shin Megami Tensei IV doesn't randomly place you in a battle but dangerous areas are teeming with enemies that are often not easy or impossible to get away from.

Xenoblade Chronicles has no random encounters either.

All of these are pretty good JRPG's that are worth looking into if you like JRPG's but don't want to deal with traditional random encounters. I'm sure there are more if you want to research JRPG's without random encounters.

"The solution is to research the games you want (as in, watch videos of them on Youtube, Google information about them, ask if the JRPG's you are interested in have random encounters) and if they have random encounters, don't buy them." <--- That's the obvious solution and what I was going to do. (and what I actually was doing at least for a while) But as I've explained, this is basically me giving the game companies a helping hand, and is putting myself through a bunch of hoops just to make sure the game I'm getting is playable.

"You treat them as something malicious, but they aren't." <-- I agree. Random encounters aren't malicious. They are merely the result of causality. Same with cancer and AIDs. Come to think of it, this reminds me of a video I saw somewhere where a guy argues that zombies aren't evil.

As you said, this requires a lot of research and sidestepping that other people don't have to put up with. If I was so smart, I should be able to tell when I'm not wanted, and not play JRPG's at all. To answer the thread, however, Persona as a series when taken as a whole, contains randomly triggered encounters, and that simply could not count as AAA in this day and age. Random encounters say a lot about a series, and among them the fact it is not AAA, but an abortion and something strictly for the niche audience. You will never have a CoD or Halo game send you to the same room over and over every single time an enemy appears solely to ration the processing power / memory of the system. "what a great idea this is"

#3 Edited by egg (1450 posts) -

@believer258 said:
@egg said:

@karkarov said:

@egg said:

You might be missing the point. You could argue all day that Persona 3/4 are different from Persona 1/2 (and I was aware of some of the differences to begin with) but by putting games *without* random encounters in the same series as games *with* random encounters, Atlus is basically saying that I am not entitled to a game that is unplayable. (When buying a game, we are frankly not entitled to much, but that is the sole exception) Furthermore, by re-releasing Persona 1/2 and even putting them on the same platform as Persona 3/4 (PSP and, due to BC and PS1 classics, Vita) then not only Atlus is being unapologetic about random encounters, they are also essentially using Persona 3/4 to peddle and promote random encounters.

Well there is nothing I can say if your only excuse for not trying Person 3 and 4 is "Persona 1 and 2 had random encounters". I mean that is honestly one of the stupidest excuses I have ever heard of for not playing a game and is pretty laughable and idiotic on all levels, but whatever floats your boat I guess. Trust me when I say it is your loss.

Mind you I am still on the fence on playing Persona 3 and 4 and might do so in the future, but I'll let you know that the reasons why I probably won't are quite rational and something I have thought carefully about, thank you very much!

Look at this way: Are Persona 1 and 2 labelled to let you know they contain randomly triggered encounters? Likewise are Persona 3 and 4 labelled to advertise that they don't have randomly triggered encounters? Is there a bullet point on the box, even? It's blatantly clear the Persona games are expressly not for people who enjoy their games to be playable. But since I am such a person, I have no business playing them and must retreat to franchises where it isn't made to be a problem. ("it is your loss" Oh, believe me. I'll live.)

After all, who's to say Persona 5 and 6 won't have randomly triggered encounters? We know Atlus is capable of it, and if it happens I would have played Persona 3 and 4 for absolutely nothing. Atlus would have stolen my money and use it to oppress me. I'd have helped them make Persona 5/6 the biggest, best, and most beloved random encounter torture instrument yet!! You may say the odds of it happening are slim, but the point is that it's possible. We know Atlus is capable of it. Persona games have and are being sold with randomly triggered encounters. Ergo, I must not buy Persona games. When the series died and burns and from the ashes rises a new IP with no connection or history to randomly triggered encounters whatsoever, then maybe I will play it. Or maybe I will not because Atlus evidently doesn't need me.

Why don't you simply ignore games with random encounters and let those of us who do enjoy games with random encounters continue to enjoy them? Everything you've said in this thread is completely irrational. Raving mad, I might say. There isn't anybody with a gun to your head, making you play games full of random encounters. Just like what you like and let others like what they like, it's no big deal.

"Why don't you simply ignore games with random encounters"

But this means ignoring all traditional JRPGs. Because to do otherwise would mean I'd have to be wallowing the mine field and very generously purchasing the praising the games without random encounters while carefully tiptoeing around the ones that do. I'd basically be hand-picking my experience with the genre for the express purpose of having my experience be something which doesn't reflect reality. It would be like going to a restaurant only on the days where the food is not infested with maggots, and only because I just so happen to know which days those are. What's the damn point? Why would I be so generous to that restaurant? Can I really like the food that much?

"There isn't anybody with a gun to your head, making you play games full of random encounters. Just like what you like and let others like what they like, it's no big deal."

It's sort of about inclusiveness. Games like Persona are made for a certain segment of gamers, and I do not fall into that segment because I reject random encounters. (even though Persona 3 and 4 don't have random encounters themselves) Even if I get Persona 3 or 4 and like it, it's purely accidental--Persona 3 and Persona 4 are probably not the result of a concerted or intelligence effort to make a great game but rather the result of causality, much like random encounters are the result of causality, much like business malpractice and political corruption are the result of causality, much like anti-semitism in early 20th century Germany is the result of causality, and much like AIDs and cancer are the result of causality. What's the point of liking something based on luck? Random encounters are the result of luck, whereas me hating them is not the result of luck but the result of having standards. To have standards and to play JRPGs that just so happen to not have random encounters (gee, how nice) is something that cannot be reconciled in my mind.

Granted the same could be said of all games/genres. The popularity of FPS and the mass copying of ideas from Halo (e.g. regenerating health) followed by CoD is blatantly a display of causality. But whereas on one hand you have game genres, on the other hand you have game genres with fucking random encounters, bleh.

#4 Edited by egg (1450 posts) -

@belegorm said:

@egg:

You consider the first two persona games to be poor because they had random encounters? Please tell me I have misinterpreted your post because it sounds like you just dismissed virtually all traditional JRPG's with a wave of your hand because in your own opinion you consider random encounters to be "anti-exploration."

"You consider the first two persona games to be poor because they had random encounters?" <-- No, I don't consider them to be poor. I consider them to be unplayable. There's a difference.

"Please tell me I have misinterpreted your post because it sounds like you just dismissed virtually all traditional JRPG's with a wave of your hand because in your own opinion you consider random encounters to be "anti-exploration."" <-- No, that's not it. The problem with random encounters isn't that they're anti-exploration. (although they certainly are anti-exploration, and just another example of how they are fundamentally poisonous to a game) The problem with random encounters is that they are an inexcusable game flaw. It is akin to putting a cockroach in a burger. No matter how good the burger is or how small the cockroach is, it would be even better without the cockroach at all, but the chefs (the game makers) are so stubborn and delusional that they fight this plainly obvious fact to the bitter end on some deeply misguided value of "tradition".

edit: If you wore a shock collar around your neck and it zapped you every time you tried to explore, would that not be considered anti-exploration? There is something called negative reinforcement.

#5 Posted by egg (1450 posts) -

@karkarov said:

@egg said:

You might be missing the point. You could argue all day that Persona 3/4 are different from Persona 1/2 (and I was aware of some of the differences to begin with) but by putting games *without* random encounters in the same series as games *with* random encounters, Atlus is basically saying that I am not entitled to a game that is unplayable. (When buying a game, we are frankly not entitled to much, but that is the sole exception) Furthermore, by re-releasing Persona 1/2 and even putting them on the same platform as Persona 3/4 (PSP and, due to BC and PS1 classics, Vita) then not only Atlus is being unapologetic about random encounters, they are also essentially using Persona 3/4 to peddle and promote random encounters.

Well there is nothing I can say if your only excuse for not trying Person 3 and 4 is "Persona 1 and 2 had random encounters". I mean that is honestly one of the stupidest excuses I have ever heard of for not playing a game and is pretty laughable and idiotic on all levels, but whatever floats your boat I guess. Trust me when I say it is your loss.

Mind you I am still on the fence on playing Persona 3 and 4 and might do so in the future, but I'll let you know that the reasons why I probably won't are quite rational and something I have thought carefully about, thank you very much!

Look at this way: Are Persona 1 and 2 labelled to let you know they contain randomly triggered encounters? Likewise are Persona 3 and 4 labelled to advertise that they don't have randomly triggered encounters? Is there a bullet point on the box, even? It's blatantly clear the Persona games are expressly not for people who enjoy their games to be playable. But since I am such a person, I have no business playing them and must retreat to franchises where it isn't made to be a problem. ("it is your loss" Oh, believe me. I'll live.)

After all, who's to say Persona 5 and 6 won't have randomly triggered encounters? We know Atlus is capable of it, and if it happens I would have played Persona 3 and 4 for absolutely nothing. Atlus would have stolen my money and use it to oppress me. I'd have helped them make Persona 5/6 the biggest, best, and most beloved random encounter torture instrument yet!! You may say the odds of it happening are slim, but the point is that it's possible. We know Atlus is capable of it. Persona games have and are being sold with randomly triggered encounters. Ergo, I must not buy Persona games. When the series died and burns and from the ashes rises a new IP with no connection or history to randomly triggered encounters whatsoever, then maybe I will play it. Or maybe I will not because Atlus evidently doesn't need me.

#6 Posted by egg (1450 posts) -

It only comes out on obsolete hardware.

You mean like every console game?

#7 Edited by egg (1450 posts) -

@karkarov said:

@egg said:

I'm not talking about story. Things like genre, game structure, mechanics, art style, and themes are more important. (case in point, Final Fantasy games have no story relation to each other yet they are still part of the same series and many of them are highly similar games.) Even having played none of the Persona games I can safely say they are related enough to be in the same series. But even if that were not the case then the fact stands they all have the word Persona in the title.

You seem to misunderstand, I already was willing to treat Persona 3/4 as standalone titles, and since they don't have random encounters then technically there should be no problem in me playing them, but later I woke up to reality and realized they are part of the same series (subseries no less) as games with random encounters, and to make matters worse those games are on the same system. When there is a "Persona sale" on PSN both random encounter games and non random encounter games are included in the sale. Players are invited to "see where it all began". So what use it there to argue that Persona 3/4 are totally separate from 1/2? If that were true then why are they part of the same series? Why wasn't Persona 3 called Persona: Postmortem or something (for example) and Persona 4 be called Persona: Postmortem 2? That may be technically part of the same series still but at least its an effort!

Uh actually they are wildly different in music, presentation, and mechanics. In fact other than the name "Persona" and a similarity in story (all four at least initially center around high schoolers, their persona, and some whacked out occult stuff) 1 and 2 have basically nothing in common with 3 and 4. I could talk all day about the differences if you like but trust me when I say there is a reason 3/4 are by far the most popular two in the series. They are far easier to pick up and play, no where near as ball bustingly hard, less grindy, have a better art style, better combat, some might say better characters, and tons less grim dark everything sucks.

Just watch some of the Persona 4 endurance run. If you don't like what you see don't play it. But don't refuse to play on some misguided concept that it has lots in common with Person 1/2 because they are wildly different games.

You might be missing the point. You could argue all day that Persona 3/4 are different from Persona 1/2 (and I was aware of some of the differences to begin with) but by putting games *without* random encounters in the same series as games *with* random encounters, Atlus is basically saying that I am not entitled to a game that is unplayable. (When buying a game, we are frankly not entitled to much, but that is the sole exception) Furthermore, by re-releasing Persona 1/2 and even putting them on the same platform as Persona 3/4 (PSP and, due to BC and PS1 classics, Vita) then not only Atlus is being unapologetic about random encounters, they are also essentially using Persona 3/4 to peddle and promote random encounters.

Persona 3 and Persona 4 each don't exist in a vacuum, as unfortunate as that may be. They exist in a pool of games, both by the fact that they are part of the same series as other games, and the fact they are part of the same genre and appeal to the same demographic as other games. Therefore, until randomly triggered encounters are permanently extinguished, I have no business purchasing any title in the Persona series. If I have to research a game just to make sure it doesn't have random encounters (which shouldn't exist in the first place, not anymore, not in the last decade, and not in the past two decades) then I probably shouldn't get the game in the first place, even if it turns out the game doesn't have random encounters. Why? Because the fact stands that I had to check--Provided of course I was not wrong in presuming to check, and in the case of Persona (or any series that contains random encounters in some of the installments AND those particular installments being re-released even after the installments without random encounters were released) someone would have been absolutely not wrong to check.

#8 Edited by egg (1450 posts) -

@jamin724 said:
  • Final Fantasy IX
  • Final Fantasy VII
  • Final Fantasy VIII
  • Persona 2: Eternal Punishment
  • Final Fantasy Anthology
  • Final Fantasy Origins
  • Persona
  • Persona 2: Eternal Punishment
  • Persona 2: Innocent Sin

1) Those contain randomly triggered encounters

2) lol you listed the same game twice

3) Final Fantasy Tactics has a glitch where if you save in the middle of a multi-part battle there is no way to back out.

4) Jumping Flash is a PS1 classic

#10 Posted by egg (1450 posts) -

@egg: so what you're saying is mayo is obviously better?

the egg industry kills all newborn male chicks since they obviously can't produce eggs. in other words roughly 50 percent of newborn chicks are immediately killed. #MensRights

this is done in one of two ways. The newborn chicks are either tossed into lacerators, or a heap of them are put into a garbage bag and suffocated.

They are the lucky ones. Hens have their beaks cut off with a hot iron and unless a farm is free range they spend their entire life immobilized in a cage.