Do You Have Any Unpopular Gaming Opinions?

[Xeogred]

Then you're playing the wrong RPGs.

Outside of SRPGs, I can't think of any RPGs with strategy in the battle system. They're all attack, attack, attack, heal, cast fire on the ice dragon, etc. The games are played for the plots and characters; not the combat.

I can't agree at all on the last part there and I have a feeling many here would say the same. An RPG can have a glorious amazing story, but if the battle system is bad, boring, or gruesomely long/repetitive, I'm probably not finishing it.

[pierrot]

Breath of Fire V

Unlikely any amount of "attack, attack, attack, heal, cast fire on the ice dragon, etc" will get one through this game. Really wish it would get the recognition and notoriety EarthBound does.


I did forget about the instant win scenarios in EB. Those are pretty nice. They're still often very inconsistent though, where I might fail to get a preemptive attack, and have to actually go into the battle to kill the enemy in one hit before it gets a turn off anyway. It doesn't really serve me much good until the enemies are actually running away from me, and at that point, the XP I would receive is mostly trivial anyway.

[Menegrothx]

I just started playing BOF V, been enjoying the the battle system so far. People usually say that IV is the best though, I haven't really played this one far enough to tell which one I prefer

[pierrot]

I just started playing BOF V, been enjoying the the battle system so far. People usually say that IV is the best though, I haven't really played this one far enough to tell which one I prefer

I actually never really liked IV. It felt really lackluster to me, but in all honesty, while I like the series, 1-4 are pretty average games. The only real criticism I've heard against V is how drastically it changes the formula of the series, but I think the overhaul made for a drastically better game. I'm a little sad to see that Capcom's attempt at a sixth installment appears to be undoing all the gains V made in atmosphere and gameplay. (Not that I think it will be all that good, regardless of the mechanics implemented.)

[brunoafh]

Well Breath of Fire I-IV and V are so completely different that it's almost weird to compare them. I think IV is probably the best of the original games which are to the point traditional JRPGs, but V is just another beast entirely and should be judged separately. Although it is technically a numbered sequel, it's basically like comparing Final Fantasy I-X to Final Fantasy Tactics. So if you prefer one over the other, it says more about what style of game you prefer moreso than which one you thought was higher quality.

[pierrot]

Although it is technically a numbered sequel, it's basically like comparing Final Fantasy I-X to Final Fantasy Tactics.

It is a numbered sequel, and I don't quite agree with the analog. I'd say it's more like comparing FF XII or XIII to FF 1-6; or even FF2 to FF1. In any case, I don't see how it would be in any way more dubious than pitting games from entirely different series against each other.

[brunoafh]

I'd say it's more like comparing FF XII or XIII to FF 1-6; or even FF2 to FF1.

I dunno, it is completely different than the previous games outside some basic battle mechanics. FF XIII is actually a(n unsuccessful) call back to the early-mid games, whereas BoF V is a noticeably intentional divergence from the series. FF I to II, I could agree with more, as there are both huge narrative and gameplay changes that alter the entire flow of the games.

I was just trying to make a general comparison, but I guess to zero it down and keep it more local I would say it's like comparing Final Fantasy III/V to Final Fantasy VI-VIII. The games have very different goals/focus, and outside references, are barely similar or related. Yet, still in the same relative ballpark, genre, and franchise.

[BoneSnapDeez]

As far as BoF goes, I liked II the best.

Couldn't stand V at all unfortunately.

[Xeogred]

V sounds like a love or hate kind of thing. Still need to hit it up myself sometime.

I think I generally see people praise BoFIII the most, but I thought IV blew it away. I thought I was kind of in the minority there. Absolutely loved IV's OST and constantly seeing things from the antagonists' view was really cool and well done. Not to mention one of the bad endings is probably one of the most messed up endings I've ever seen in a JRPG. I guess there was some other censored stuff like a scene with beheading and other craziness. I've been wanting to revisit it for awhile.

I could never really get into the first two. They seem so bare bones and... I don't know? Haven't grabbed me yet.

Love the look of both III-IV, I really wish Xenogears looked like them. I think the BoF games just had the four angles thing going whereas Xenogears was true 3D with 2D sprites and is pretty rough on the eyes in comparison lol.

[pierrot]

I dunno, it is completely different than the previous games outside some basic battle mechanics.

The core concepts are still there, and really, what does it matter if a sequel diverges from its forebears.

As far as BoF goes, I liked II the best.

Couldn't stand V at all unfortunately.

BoF II was one of the first RPGs I'd ever played/beaten, and ten or so years ago, I probably would have said that BoF II is my favorite of the series. (Might have even said it was one of my favorite RPGs.) Quite frankly, it's not a particularly stellar game. It doesn't do anything particularly wrong, but the story is really rather weak, and outside of Katt, the shamans and town building, it's pretty unremarkable. Also, the dragon system in II really sucks.