Chrono Trigger - 18 Years Later

[dunpeal2064]

I don't think the game has to necessarily be challenging, but I do prefer my turn-based rpgs to at least be a little more engaging. CT boils down to "level up to learn moves, equip basic gear, push X button to win"

Compare this to FFVI. There, many characters actually function differently. Cyan's bar filling up, Sabin's fighting game moves, Edgar's tools, Gau, Strago, etc. Sure, it still boils down to pushing X to win, but I feel more engaged with the game when characters work differently. On top of that, VI lets you equip Espers to teach different magic spells to different characters, as well as focusing on certain stats that you may want that character to have more of. Again, in the end, you end up with whatever magic you need, and you push X, but I still feel more engaged in the game.


Then again, I do not think an RPG needs to be fair in any way. You get save points, there is nothing wrong with entering a fight and dying, and having to figure out a way to take the boss down. When the answer is grinding, I don't find that to be the best form of difficulty, but games like Nocturne will very often destroy you with a boss the first time, but with how much strategy can be applied to that game, it is always possible for you to win without grinding (aside Lucifer, but super bosses are kinda their own thing).

To me, CT is in the same league as FF IV or Lunar. Its charming, fun, and simple, but the actual gameplay lacks depth, and I would not play the games were the sprites and music swapped with something less interesting. Its all atmosphere. Nothing wrong with that, but I can understand why someone would be underwhelmed by the game.

It is still infinitely better than Chrono Cross.

[CavZee]

Damn I've never known anyone who likes JRPGs but didn't like Chrono Trigger.

You only had like 5 hours to go, btw.

Yeah I'm a little shocked actually, but we're all different I guess.

I can respect where he's coming from. It really isn't a game that makes you sweat and if that's what you like out of your RPGs you're not going to find it here.

For me though, an RPG needs a good story and an interesting world to experience in order to keep me hooked and Chrono Trigger is overflowing with that and a truckload of charm.

I agree with this completely. More important to me than battle systems and skill trees is the world and characters and how well it all comes together with the story. The games that have those nailed are what usually please me the most.

[Valkyrie-Favor]

...the game is well balanced so you don't have to grind...if someone likes "grind" in their RPGs that isn't to blame on the particular well designed RPG who doesn't require it - tastes are different I guess).

I dislike grinding too. Fighting battles you can already win, several times over, just to fill bars? Not my thing. I like turn-based games that require planning and strategy, but grind-focused games rarely requires anything beyond "stock up on potions and exterminate slimes."

Chrono Trigger is so easy, game balance was never an issue. JRPGs like Phantasy Star II waste the player's time by making him fight the same battles over and over and over to level up, but at least there's fun to be had in the long game. Money and items are hard to get, making each dungeon a major risk. Too bad it's more efficient to wander around the newest town and sleep at the inn all the time.

"Grind-heavy" is not the same as "high difficulty;" it means "wasting the player's time by making him repeat a problem he's already overcome." Chrono Trigger is a miserably grind-heavy game.

You are pretty much always prepared to win any encounter...there is no real incentive to play risky anyway....I believe there will be some boss encounters...where you may need to retry once or twice.

Exactly.

To me, CT is in the same league as FF IV or Lunar. Its charming, fun, and simple, but the actual gameplay lacks depth, and I would not play the games were the sprites and music swapped with something less interesting. Its all atmosphere.

FFIV is far better than CT and Lunar - of course, I played the hardest version (on PS1) at the fastest speed. There's fun to be had with resource management, exploring dungeons, and fighting quickly and decisively (that last part goes away if you turn down the battle speed). As for Lunar...I "ranted" about that in some other thread a few months ago

I liked the music of FFVI a whole lot and I've beaten it twice. That said, if I think a game has great music but is boring, I'll just get the soundtrack.

Compare this to FFVI. There, many characters actually function differently. Cyan's bar filling up, Sabin's fighting game moves, Edgar's tools, Gau, Strago, etc. Sure, it still boils down to pushing X to win, but I feel more engaged with the game when characters work differently. On top of that, VI lets you equip Espers to teach different magic spells to different characters, as well as focusing on certain stats that you may want that character to have more of.

Control over character growth is a great way to make an RPG more engaging. In FFVI's case it barely matters since your physical-attack characters are so powerful.

...when each battle doesn't really have that many choices it is hard to keep things fair without also being easy (usually the strategy is just which opponent to "focus fire" on, and heal up with items or skills when the HP of one of your dudes gets low).

Many of your choices are so similar that it doesn't matter what you choose - making them boring.

Sure, it's harder to make an interesting game than a boring or impossible one, but there are plenty of good ones out there. The recent Shin Megami Tensei IV offers some very interesting solutions to the typical problems of the JRPG - at least in the beginning.

If you want challenging battles that are also fair you probably want a battle system that has more depth, like a Tactical RPG.

The SRPG is the same as the standard JRPG - the only major difference is the option to move your characters around on a grid. That might seem obvious, but consider this: The strategy of a standard JRPG must be non-spatial. Even if Fire Emblem makes positioning supremely important, many SPRGs derive most of their challenge from non-spatial rules. That the grid-based tactics game is higher than the JRPG is no excuse for Chrono Trigger's lack of depth.

CT has a veneer of complexity layered on the combat system to make it more interesting...but it isn't...more than choosing who to focus fire on and healing up when your HP gets dangerously low.

Veneer is the right word. The entire strategy is to kill weak enemies first and heal yourself when damaged.

...if you like this type of RPG I'm surprised if you don't like Chrono Trigger.

We categorize RPGs based on structure, and we end up with 7th Saga and Etrian Odyssey in the same category as Chrono Trigger and Bowser's Inside Story. Wouldn't you say the selling points of those games are entirely different? Even if they're laid out the same way, the design philosophies are opposite.

With that in mind, my distaste for Chrono Trigger shouldn't surprise anyone.

[Ivo]

I am not a huge fan of the so-called JRPG and I haven't yet played FFIV or VI (or VII for that matter) so take that into account.

Regardless, I did play FFIII which if I recall has the job system used in FFT (or at least something similar), and that didn't make the battle system much more than "Focus fire and heal when needed" either.

To clarify my points:

1. With the battle system of CT, I don't think you can make it "hard" without making it grindy.
I believe this is very much a general feature of JRPGs, there may be some exceptions, but I thing even those may be mostly just putting more layers (or extra veneer) on top to disguise that your choices do no matter that much.
[stuff like Mario RPG is a bit different because of the button timings and so on; I don't know about FFVI or Megami Tensei, sorry]

This is I think a fundamental difference to SRPGs - and I don't think it is necessarily due to the spatial component, although that is certainly one way of making choices matter. I also haven't had time to play Pokemon, but I guess that is an example where there is no spacial component but your choices really do matter.

2. Therefore, if my understanding of the JRPG as having this issue in general is correct (I think it is), my reasoning is: if you like JRPGs, you accept this flaw (or even like it and don't consider it a flaw) and like the other aspects. CT has the other aspects very well developed. Hence, if you like JRPGs, I'm surprised if you don't like CT.

What seems to be the case with some people is they don't actually like JRPGs, but maybe they like SRPGs and the (few?) specific JRPGs that avoid this flaw (like Mario RPG, Pokemon, possibly Megami Tensei), and then it won't be so surprising they don't like CT either.

[Ack]

I think the thread would be better served by Valkyrie giving us examples of RPGs he thought did thinks correctly, so he coudl emphasize points about what was successful in a particular instance.

[dunpeal2064]

1. With the battle system of CT, I don't think you can make it "hard" without making it grindy.

That was my point though, I don't necessarily want the game to be harder, I just want it to be more involving. Super Mario RPG isn't hard, but it is a blast to actually play, scenery and setting aside. Same with Legend of Dragoon, Shadow Hearts, Mana Khemia, Legaia, Xenogears, FFXIII ( )... they are all turn-based, but have a nice, involved combat system.

Then there is the out-of-combat involvement. CT has you equip a couple pieces of gear, and learn magic at set levels. I much prefer the way VI did things, as well as games like FFVIII, FFX, Nocturne, Persona, ... heck even something as simple as learning skills from weapons in FFIX feels more engaging, even though it still provides the same outcome. And yes, I would say the job class systems in V and X-2 provide that level of engagement.

I would welcome some difficulty into the game, but like you said, the entire combat engine would have to be changed (to be more involving) in order to get real difficulty, and not just end up with a grind fest. But, difficulty isn't the only thing missing.

While the complaint is often thrown at turn-based games in general, I really feel like CT is just, "Hit button, walk, hit button". I never stop to manage characters, never get excited about combat... its like, the moments when you are actually playing the game are the least interesting.

I admit, I probably play RPGs for different reasons than most, so not trying to say that CT is genuinely a bad game. I just don't think its a holy grail of a game that has to be liked by anyone who enjoys the genre.

What seems to be the case with some people is they don't actually like JRPGs, but maybe they like SRPGs and the (few?) specific JRPGs that avoid this flaw (like Mario RPG, Pokemon, possibly Megami Tensei), and then it won't be so surprising they don't like CT either.

Well, maybe I have been lucky, but I have come across dozens of jrpgs that are more involving than CT. Pretty much anything from the ps1/ps2 era has more character management, and a lot of them have more interesting combat systems too. I hardly think CT should be where we measure what the standard jrpg is (maybe 16-bit, but not over all), and I don't think anything that outreaches what CT does with its gameplay should be considered "specific jrpgs that avoid this flaw" I mean, come on... it doesn't even have item synthesis!

FFIV is far better than CT and Lunar - of course, I played the hardest version (on PS1) at the fastest speed. There's fun to be had with resource management, exploring dungeons, and fighting quickly and decisively (that last part goes away if you turn down the battle speed). As for Lunar...I "ranted" about that in some other thread a few months ago

Oh, I wasn't comparing the quality of the games, just the style. FFIV has no character management (or even party management, unless you are playing the end of the GBA release or something), and has you learn skills at set levels. It follows the same direct style that CT and Lunar do (I agree that it is the superior game out of the 3, its still not really my style of jrpg though, V and VI are much more to my taste)

[Valkyrie-Favor]

@Jagosaurus - sorry I hijacked your thread. Anything to add?

@Ack - that's what I had planned for today; I just needed to make my position clear first and give everyone some time to discuss what I'd said.
---

What seems to be the case with some people is they don't actually like JRPGs, but maybe they like SRPGs and the (few?) specific JRPGs that avoid this flaw

But, difficulty isn't the only thing missing.

I don't think anything that outreaches what CT does with its gameplay should be considered "specific jrpgs that avoid this flaw"

Dunpeal's spot on. Besides, it's silly to expect a fan of anything to like most things of its kind. I'm a mystery novel fan, and I happily call most of them terrible. Those few specific authors write a few specific books I like. Am I expected to say, "I like mystery books, but only the good ones?"

...if my understanding of the JRPG as having this issue in general is correct (I think it is), my reasoning is: if you like JRPGs, you accept this flaw (or even like it and don't consider it a flaw) and like the other aspects. CT has the other aspects very well developed. Hence, if you like JRPGs, I'm surprised if you don't like CT.

You're correct; the typical JRPG is filled with insignificant game systems or has nothing extra at all.

I disagree with accepting flaws that plague the genre. Sure, I'll play a game I like despite a minor annoyance, but I'm outspoken about CT's flaws because I like JRPGs.

I'm sure everyone knows by now, but to clarify, I mean choices regarding how to play the game, not a branching story. I mean choices that foster critical thinking and may lead to the failure of a reasonable player.

Regardless, I did play FFIII which if I recall has the job system used in FFT (or at least something similar), and that didn't make the battle system much more than "Focus fire and heal when needed" either.

That's right, FFIII's all about dungeon crawling. Normal battles might as well be automated since they serve only to decrement your HP.

---

Now's a good time to split up the 3 layers most RPGs consist of. There are exceptions of course.

The ontogenic game is concerned with manipulating numbers which represent attributes of the characters or game world - most commonly EXP. It continues throughout the entire RPG. Both the long and short games drive the ontogenic game - so named because it's almost always character growth or army building.

Other examples: Long-term survival, falling in love, building a farm, growing a game development business. You could make an argument for putting the story here, but I'll be ignoring that since we're talking strategy.

The long game recurs several times during the RPG. It leads players to the short game and usually allows access to the ontogenic game through a menu or something. Often the most varied of the three layers.

Examples: quests, dungeon exploration, puzzles, item/money management

The short game temporarily restricts the player's access to higher layers. Very often your avatar's strength is based on the status of the ontogenic game. The primary means of decrementing resources and of incrementing EXP.

Examples: Battles, cutscenes, minigames

Some games skip a layer - FFIV lacks an ontogenic game, for example. SRPGs often have no long game, alternating between army management, battle, and cutscenes.

I was wrong in saying FFVI lacked an ontogenic game. The player lacks control over it but the goals of fighting are ultimately to get through dungeons and to become strong enough to fight the next enemies. The bars still fill up.

SRPGs may simplify the long game, offering no exploration or extra battles, but there's always an option to customize your army and interface with the ontogenic game in between battles.

So every JRPG that I can think of really does have three layers. We can think of this structure as the definition of the "computer RPG."
-------------------

Now, I'll get to Ack's request. Keep in mind I'm evaluating each layer individually. It's not unfair if I praise La Pucelle Tactics, an SPRG, for its long or ontogenic layers.

This is much of what I meant when I said, "That the grid-based tactics game is higher than the JRPG is no excuse for Chrono Trigger's lack of depth."



Excellence in otogeny:

Fire Emblem series
Not only do you specialize your army by choosing who fights, where, and when, you can be weakened by allowing someone to die (there are stakes besides twenty minutes of your time). Very unique among Japanese RPGs. Characters who fight next to each other build relationships, which result in friendship stat bonuses and marriages, which result in offspring. These carefully balanced systems make Fire Emblem one of the most evocative and thought-provoking JRPGs of all.

Final Fantasy V
Job system demands planning of character growth. Adding a slot for learned abilities of previously held jobs potentially doubles the skillset of your party - due to your choices, some parts will be easy while others require extra resources and luck.

Valkyrie Profile 2: Silmeria
Skills learned from a tile on a hex grid. Certain rules dictate where a certain tile may be placed. Adjacent tiles of the same color strengthen each other. New einjerjar, many without skills, can be found during the long game.

Valkyrie Profile
Choosing which soldier to send to Valhalla is always a difficult ordeal. All the experience points belong to the goddess, but who will she give them to? You've only got a few months before the final battle is upon the Aesir.

La Pucelle Tactics
Anyone can equip any item. Skills and stats are both from items, creating a stat/skill tradeoff system that must be considered throughout the whole game. What type of stat and skill to choose...very important. Items and skills level up with use.

Shin Megami Tensei IV
Two growth systems. Protagonist chooses his own EXP distribution after leveling up. Your other party members are demons, which he must recruit through negotiation. Demons who fight receive EXP, those who don't get nothing. They get new skills at certain levels, but when their skill slots overfill you must choose one to forget. At this stage the protagonist may fill his own skill slots with that demon's skills. Demons may be fused to create new ones. The Demon Gauntlet offers support abilities, bought with a separate set of points.

Star Ocean: Second Evolution
The skill system allows characters to make money, pickpocket, forge items, lean battle abilities, and improve specific stats beyond experience points. Unfortunately, there's also a skill that increases the rate of XP gain I'm highlighting this system only; the world you interact with turns out to be pretty boring and the game is still very easy. Also worth nothing are the "private actions" which let you get to know the characters and their relationships better - you can get a lot of endings based on their romance and friendships if you care for that sort of thing.

Excellence in the long game

Shin Megami Tensei IV
You're never safe. Careful management of MP and HP makes for suspenseful dungeon crawls. Demons fill HP and MP on level up - plan for this. HP and MP are also filled when demons are fused. Map design is rather lame though.

Dragon Warrior III
Everything is scarce. Labyrinthine environments and bizarre puzzles (Parcheesi ) are fascinating, but you must temper your curiosity because enemies are always wearing you down. Stray into unknown territory and you might get killed and sent back to the nearest king - who can use his divine favor to bring you back to life for money. It costs more every time. Just wait until you're dead and broke. A triumph of traditional risk-vs-reward dungeon design, even if it's not as hard as the PC classics.

Valkyrie Profile 1 and 2
Dungeons rendered as multi-layered platformers, which can be labyrinthine, nonlinear, and vast. Interesting puzzles in VP1. VP2 takes it to a new level with Soul Gems that, when placed on a dais, change the rules of the entire dungeon. Enemies may be frozen and staked on each other. In VP2 you can switch places with one by striking it with a teleportation bullet. Valkyrie Profile 2 has the best long game I've encountered in an RPG.

Mario and Luigi: Superstar SagaEasy game, but it should be mentioned for its creative environments and puzzles, which can't be negotiated without the coordinated teamwork of both brothers (anyone who likes Chrono Trigger will love this).

Excellence in the short game

Dragon warrior III
Very few commands - attack, defend, item, magic, run. Your enemies are powerful and they come in great numbers. Warriors can tank for a while, but mages are glass cannons. Despite appearances, DWIII is far from a "press attack to win" game. You'll need to think several turns ahead.

Shin Megami Tensei IV
Wide variety of skills invite many approaches to any encounter, but only a few will work. Figure it out. If you grind up ten levels and fight carelessly, regular enemies will decimate you. There's much to think about - matching buffs and elemental affinities, random area attacks vs reliable single attacks, and getting extra turns with critical hits.

Valkyrie Profile
Just read Wikipedia's description of the battle system:

Valkyrie Profile has a unique turn-based battle system. The two sides wage battle during alternate turns, with the whole party sharing one turn and able to attack simultaneously during that turn. Each enemy is given their own turn and do not combine attacks with one another. Each of the party members is assigned to one of the buttons on the controller (Square, Triangle, Circle, or Cross). Pressing the corresponding button on the player's turn orders that character to attack. Fighters have three character-specific attacks each turn, though weapons can limit how many they can use. Mages cast their preset offensive spells, which builds up their CT (Charge Time). Charge Time replaces MP, decreases slowly on its own, and prevents casting spells when above 0. While a mage's CT decreases, they cannot perform any actions, though there are skills that allow exceptions to this.

Stringing attacks together produces combos that prevent a target from defending or recovering, yield Magic Crystals and Fire Gems that increase experience and reduce CT, and add to the Hit Gauge. When the Hit Gauge reaches 100% in one turn, a character that participated in the combo that filled the Hit Gauge may perform a special attack ("Purify Weird Soul") that causes great damage and refills the Hit Gauge, possibly allowing another character to use their Purify Weird Soul. Using a Purify Weird Soul causes CT to rise, so characters must wait several turns before they can perform another one. Fighters have unique Purify Weird Souls. Mages use either multi-hit versions of their selected spells or Great Magic, elaborate versions of their selected spells that strike all enemies. Only certain scepters allow the use of Great Magic; human-forged Great Magic-capable scepters have a high chance of breaking with such use, and unbreakable ether-coated ones are extremely rare. Damage is not capped so the party may attack an enemy until they no longer have any available moves rather than being limited to the total HP (health points) of the target.

At the beginning of each battle, Lenneth summons her einherjar to combat. As she is needed to keep them materialized, if Lenneth is defeated in combat, she must be revived within three turns or the party will be defeated. Lenneth is also the only character who cannot be voluntarily removed from the party at any point in the game.


Valkyrie Profile 2: Silmeria
Its hybrid turn-based/real time system might be the most advanced of any JRPG. It's essentially an extension of Valkyrie Profile's system, set on a 3D map. Some are quite large. 3D considerations: Enemies run at you if you're in their line of sight. They attack if you're in range too. Action Points are used for attacking, casting spells, and moving. You can use AP to "dash" over lines of sight with impunity.

Your party of 4 can be split up into 2 groups (1&3 or 2&2). Class differences are more pronounced, but because you never have to send einjerjar to Valhalla, it's completely practical to have four mages or heavy swordsmen in one party.

Can't recommend this game of complex combos and small group tactics enough.

La Pucelle Tactics
Actions during battle directly affect ontogenic game. Equipment can be changed during battle, allowing and eventually demanding more multifaceted strategies with many equipment sets. Monsters can be recruited during battle with careful planning.

Final Fantasy V
Standard setup but better - many bosses and regular enemy formations require you to take advantage of your expanded arsenal. Powerful attacks and active-time-battle system demand you think quickly, but you can just pause.

Final Fantasy XIII
Controversial evolution of the standard Final Fantasy system. Like it or not, we can all agree that it's conceptually a step in the right direction. Rather than choosing from a set of commands, we're primarily concerned with which set of commands to use. You choose a set of paradigms before battle and shift between them while fighting. As you obtain more paradigms, and grow each paradigm of each character in the ontogenic layer, the game slowly becomes more demanding.

Radiant Historia


Enemies are placed on a 3 x 3 grid, with each enemy standing in a single slot, except for some large enemies spanning multiple slots. If the player attacks an enemy who is in a grid space near the attacking character, the enemy will incur greater damage. However, the player will also be open to greater damage.

Some attacks can move enemies around the grid, stacking them on the same slot until a combo ends and consecutive attacks on this group of enemies hit all of them. Despite being a turn-based combat system each member of the party can switch turns with the others and even with enemies, giving more freedom to the player to perform combos and deal further damage to enemies, but having its risks too, as a party member who switches turns become more vulnerable until becoming able to move again.


A damn good idea! Praising the battle system only; battles themselves are very easy and each enemy formation is repeated way too much. If there had been more, and they'd been planned as lovingly as those of SMT boss encounters, it could've had the best turn-base short game around.

-----------------

Much can be learned from those games about the craft of the JRPG. Hopefully anyone designing JRPGs has played or heard of the above.

I advance the five precepts, defining features of a great JRPG:

1. tension based on a combination of scarcity and threat
---if scarcity deceases, threat must rise to compensate, and vice versa

2. strategically significant options for dealing with both

3. an expanding possibility space that continually asks more of the player as enemies and party members become more powerful

4. incentive for the player to take risks
---required or non-required, anything from a fork in the road to bonus romance cutscenes

5. cross-layer interactivity

What do you guys think about my Five Precepts of JRPG Design? Are they all crazy? All false? Alright?

If you happen to like them, it'll be a great way to advance our RPG discussion. We'll be able to skip a lot of groundwork and explanation, simply saying "I did not like Chrono Trigger because it violated the first four precepts," or "Although Conception II was pretty creepy, it upheld the third precept very well. Whenever a new card class was introduced, I had to..."

I don't expect anyone else to, but I'll be referring to this post in the future.

P.S.
-----------------------
I've got nothing against those who enjoy JRPGs as cotton candy - it's essentially the same as an adult relaxing with Saturday morning cartoons. I do value the presentation of my RPGs and occasionally one does tell a good story. I have a figurine of Lenneth. I have several game soundtracks; those of Valkyrie Profile 1 and 2 are among the best. Jeanne D'arc made me tear up. Moe art preferred. Claude's gonna date the heroine with the longest hair.

[Ack]

Hmm, a very well thought out system, VF. If you don't mind, I do have a few questions about the precepts to help further clarify them.

1. Tension based on scarcity and threat.

When you say scarcity, do you mean a particular type of resource or any potential resource the game provides, be it the classic Hit Points, some sort of Mana Points or resource regarding special moves("magic" or the like), the Life Points of games like Saga Frontier, a monetary system, items within the game, equipment that wears down, etc.

Is threat acceptable as a "luck-based," more randomized endeavor, such as fluctuating random encounter rates, rarer encounters, etc.

What about potential "threat" from the ontogenic game, such as major characters leaving at various points within the game for a period of time or permanently leaving the party/dying based on game events, major decisions which might enable one route of progression while removing others, etc.? Or non-permanent threats that solely affect the short-term game, such as a status effect?

2. When you say strategically significant options for dealing with scarcity and threat, do you mean in one or multiple layers? For instance, in Fire Emblem characters can die permanently, affecting both the ontogenic and the short game(or the long, if you view the battle as the long game and the individual fights as the short).

3. Do you mean evolving systems that become inherently more complex as the game progresses? Is there not a point where such expansion should slow as the mechanics become ingrained in the player, or should the game continually drive for more complexity even after the ideas are understood? How far can or should a system evolve?

4. Risks can be hugely variable. It could mean something as relatively insignificant as acquiring a different item or permanently kill a character. Is there a certain level of risk you are in favor of, or could it be as simple as "Well, this character has gotten a small healing item versus a small offensive item."

5. But if a game excels in one particular layer, should it be knocked for not providing others, such as the SRPG example given earlier?

=========================================================

I don't think you should completely knock "cotton candy" RPGs, as they do offer one major benefit: they are easy to pick up and play, which is immensely helpful when a player doesn't have the requisite time to sink into a much more complex title. Many of us simply don't have the time to spend on exceedingly deep games anymore.

I also think that sheer complexity does not automatically trump visual, auditory, or story presentation. I think a truly great RPG will have both excellent presentation and rewarding gameplay.

[Xeogred]

Where's o.p so him and I can praise Secret of Mana instead.

CT is amazing and I've beaten it several times... but my feelings on it are a bit odd.
- Sci-fi fanboy so lots of extra points here
- Mitsuda and Uematsu together? Yeah the OST is insane
- Time travel is always really cool

But the game does have weird parts and mechanics topped off with the pacing, it's like a little... disjointed sometimes? The characters beyond Robo and Frog never stood out too much to me either. I don't know. I think I would personally put FFIV-VI, SoM, all the Xeno's, and more above it. But it's still damn good and I won't knock on anyone for praising it (though I certainly hope it never gets a sequel, people need to remember Square Enix is not Square Soft! haha, it would probably be baaaaaaaad).

I don't know if it's just me or not, but having played and beaten all the Chrono / Xeno games extensively, I think it's easy to see they probably truly do have a lot of the core same staff, the "Dream Team" as some might dub it and to this day, they probably remain in Monolith Soft. From Xenogears and on though, it's easy to see how strong Tetsuya Takahashi's influence and such is though with their crazier stories, but I think you can still see a trace of that in Crono Cross too with some stuff. Either way, the character portraits, writing, weird non-linear sections, and the design all around feels very similar to me in all these games and I think that's really cool.

[Ivo]

It seems most of you have played far, far more JRPGs than I have (but I'm being open about it).

I'm surprised that Xenogears (I did play that one!) was offered as an example of "engaging" and difficult combat. Did I just understand that wrong? You press more buttons, I guess. And it seemed also to be balanced such that it wasn't grindy. I would put it about on the same level as Chrono Trigger in that it too has a veneer of complexity to the battle system (well two battle systems), but for the most part your choices don't really matter that much.

Same goes for Chrono Cross as well (also played that one). Except that the veneer of complexity there is a bit annoying at times (although, I did like the auto-healing at end of combat, saves a lot of unnecessary effort).

Another point: As far as I know, Fire emblem is a classic example of a SRPG. It is even grid based! Should it (or Shining Force, or FFT, or Tactics Ogre) be used as an example of a JRPG that does combat in an interesting way?

Conversely, for stuff like Secret of Mana, where the combat system is real time and so on. I'm not sure this is what is up for discussion here.

I don't know - I would say myself that I am not a fan of the genre, but I like the best examples (and I would put CT as one). The combat system is not that bad, and it doesn't need to be brilliant because they did away with one of the nasty genre conventions - the random encounters.

Valk would say that disliking the mediocre or even average games in the genre does not mean you're not a fan of the genre.
But if you apparently *only* like the ones that are exceptional, then almost by definition I say that you don't like the genre - only the exceptions!
In any case maybe we only disagree on that difference in definitions.

I would expect that someone who likes e.g. platformers (as a genre) would have enjoyed average stuff like, I don't know, Aero the Acrobat, whereas someone who is not a fan of platformers in general may still enjoy truly great examples, such as classic Mario or Braid (and it would surprise me if the actual fans of the genre do not enjoy the great examples). Same goes for FPSs perhaps, where people that are not fans of the genre may still like stuff like Doom or Portal, and I expect fans to enjoy them.