GrizzlyButts

It looks like the same team that made that remake of the first Mana game. I mean I'm excited to play it regardless of how crap it looks. Was planning on replaying it on the snes classic too. Why Square doesn't give Seiken Densetsu 3 it's day in the sun has baffled me for decades. It is the best game in the series.

@freedom4556: The shirtless guy wearing a sequined vest is just hilariously bad in every culture.

@teddie: To be fair most of them aren't simple palette swaps, they toss in a few polygons here and there, but you're right. Like why am I fighting teleporting ghost horses in the great crystal? If you just look at the 20 variations of Wyrm in the game, they just kept piling shit on the designs. Hell wyrm has so much crap stacked on his design it's comical. FF13 enemy design used the exact same method for variety.

@eurobum: Whatever problem you have with use of language is perhaps coming from too conservative a place. There's no reason to be reductive and it comes across as belittling. If you won't allow me to love a video game in a blog then perhaps you don't understand how important games are to the people who play them. I'll be as passionate as I damn well please.

I thought the same back in the day, but playing through the story again changed my mind. None of the main characters are particularly offensive, in fact most of them are a little too subdued. Although, I see how you might equate Penelo with someone like Selphie or Vanille... but she's actually way less irritating. Did you play the first Grandia? She's basically Sue and you're Justin. She's annoying and chipper for like 3 cut-scenes in the first two hours of the game. Otherwise she just gives Vaan shit for a total of 30 seconds towards the end of the game. I didn't hear enough of her voice to get annoyed honestly, unlike Vanille.

Kingdom Hearts is perhaps the worst thing man has ever created.

Yeah depending on how you read that sentence thats what I was saying. It is way more grounded compared to most FF games, I was actually referring to III, IV and V in particular. Final Fantasy XII has been through the same critical wringer that TLoZ: The Wind Waker did, where folks are put off by it at first but hey 10 years later everyone realizes it's amazing after an HD upgrade.

I know what you mean, I basically did the same thing. I'd do everything I possibly could until I was forced to continue with the story. There's something scary and awesome about going to the Necrohol of Nabudis and figuring out the hunts and Exodus quest when you're underleveled. On my playthrough of the original game I avoided it until I was well over level 60. I played the Last Story on Wii, and kept the game but didn't keep my Wii. I'm not willing to spend what people are asking for copies of Xenoblade Chronicles, but if I ever decide to get another Wii U (first one broke when moving) I might try out Xenoblade Chronicles X. Those are definitely the types of games I love to sink a couple hundred hours into.

Yeah, I more or less agree. The stakes don't really ramp up until the final moments of the game. The amount of side-questing that opens up after the Great Crystal pulls you away from the story for too long. Comparing Vaan and Penelo to C3PO and R2D2 really made me laugh. Not because it is absurd, it isn't, but because it puts them in their place in a funny way.

The optional stuff is worth it. You might get too overpowered for the final boss, but the gear you get from Hunts is worth it. I made the mistake of trying to get the Zodiac Spear, when multiple pairs of Genji Gloves might be more useful (if you're doing the Rare Game Hunt side-quest at Phon Coast). I ended up having to keep my Red Battlemage and White Mage in the party for most of the harder boss battles, because you need fast casting white magic users against a lot of the instant KO spells.

I really want to play the Xenoblade games, it's a shame they're all Nintendo exclusives.

Well, yes and no. I think fans who actually played through it and finished it largely hold it in high regard. I meant to point towards people who took issue with the combat mechanics and never bothered to finish it. It did review incredibly well, but a lot of the discussion about the game on GameFAQs and places like that centered around 'mmo' style gameplay and Vaan being annoying. To be fair, I haven't kept my finger on that pulse and a lot of where I'm coming from are thoughts I haven't revisited since 2006-2007.

Users can report 3 times a week, you're required to select a reason why, and if your report coincides with others and leads to disciplinary action on the reported player you get additional reports towards your weekly allowance. Other players will report for just about anything, and a big one is when a player doesn't communicate. The game requires constant coordination, it is more like a football game than an FPS where pushing towards a goal requires teamwork and understanding character-to-character synergies. One role gives vision to the map and heals, one role seeks out enemies and deals damage, one role disables or debuffs enemies, and in these coordinated fights require some form of communication. Knowing what the other 4 players are doing is possible without chat or microphones, but most players get pissed if you don't tell them what you're going to be doing over the course of a 45+ minute match, especially if they think they're losing because of you.

I think you've massaged out the love-hate feeling I was trying to express. I was chasing that seemingly random convergence where a Win happens, it is akin to folk's descriptions of gambling addiction. "Hey, there's a small chance that the stars will align and you'll Win and have Fun but even when you do Win you need to Win more because it feels so good. Hours upon hours of Losing might start to feel excruciating, but you know you'll eventually roll the dice into a Win. I appreciate your words, there is always a chance I could come back to the game again someday when I'm willing to work my username back up to the friendly player bracket.

Awesome! I had no idea about this. Honestly being able to monitor this behavior score and figure out how my behavior can lead to better matchmaking is a big deal to me. I am kind of frustrated that there isn't a straightforward explanation about how these numbers can be changed rather than what they -might- represent. I'm actually itching to play games just to experiment with what/when my score can be changed. I would venture a guess that it most likely re-calculates an average per 20 games (one sequence) and in turn it would become a series of sequences in a greater average. Here is my readout:

So if I'm looking at 3462/10,000 then I'm in the lowest third behavioral pool. So basically, I need to play the game more and be nice otherwise I'll always play with people who have communication/personality problems. Something about seeing this number makes that idea more concrete to me as a player. Thanks for pointing me towards this!

@themaniacsgnome: Really? Great example of how folks involved in the negative culture perpetuate negative behavior. Of course, as my mmr reached below 2000 I should expect to play the game with awful uncooperative people? The more you lose you should expect to basically stop having fun and just give up. Figures! I just wasn't having a good time because I simply needed to win more? Ridiculous.