xyzygy

@hunter5024: I consider it an evolution because it takes elements from the past and expands upon them. Whether that is for the good or for the bad is totally subjective, but I happen to love it because I found the combat system entirely skill based.

@milkman: That is still very different. I'm talking about parity between new mobile phones that play games. My point is that Oculus is the main reason for that article, not Samsung. Oculus is in a whole other league than this and in a new, exciting field of gaming (regardless of how ridiculous the Gear VR is going to be)... whoever the fuck Oculus would have partnered with would have replaced Samsung's name in the article, simple as that. This right here is a yearly, expected, yet somehow exciting (?) new iPhone and gets a news article. Makes no sense.

@milkman: Oculus is not a phone.

The problem is there is never anything of the like for Samsung, LG, HTC, Nokia, etc etc devices on the website. In the mobile sphere, we only get news from Apple, and that is questionable. In the examples you've provided he is writing about all different things within the console and handheld gaming markets, not mobile. Within mobile, only Apple seems to exist.

The difference is that those things you mentioned have to do with the staff and they are entertaining. This is literally, as someone said above me, a regurgitation of a press release.

I get the whole thing about how it's a gaming platform, even though it's a super shitty one. What I don't get is why Apple is given such praise and deserves an article about a Phone when other companies release more innovative phones all the time with absolute zilch from this website. Phones that also play games. It's just curious and I really don't think Apple, of all companies, deserves this kind of special attention.

That's a little different. Shotguns and Assault Rifles are simply in game items. Turn based combat is an entire mechanic and the basis of the combat, one of the most important aspects (possibly the most important) of a JRPG. The equal of a FPS would be the actual mechanics yeah? Just having an assault rifle in an FPS is the same as an RPG having a sword.

And I am totally all for what you're saying - there definitely should still be turn based options out there. But what I don't think is right is expecting a single franchise to stay the way it is. Final Fantasy has evolved and I think it's right that it has. Otherwise the series would just stagnate, and that'd be just another reason for people to complain about it. And honestly, as someone who's played most of the games I can say that by the time I got around to FFIX I was intensely bored of it's combat because it was just so similar to older Final Fantasy titles and did next to nothing new. Meanwhile for example, we have another totally different game like Lost Odyssey that caters to a turn based crowd, while letting Final Fantasy go do it's own thing.

I know you're joking, but I think we'll probably see a design change, as in the UI and stuff. If you've ever played The Last Story, I'm kind of expecting something like that as it was also a third person action RPG with fast paced combat that relied heavily on party combos.

@donchipotle: Is it really though? People have been hugely let down by FFXIII (which is another story all in itself for being a perfectly fine game) and we have seen almost nothing aside from the E3 2013 trailer and it hasn't been in any shows or anything since.

I know. Many other genres move beyond stuff they've already accomplished, but for some reason JRPG fans want their genre to have the same gameplay wrapped around a new story. No thanks.