|
I love how Barret asks Cloud whether he knows about Mako reactors and then, when Cloud says yes, completely ignores him and gives the expository dialogue anyway. So, how many of the irritating side quests are you doing?
|
#
¿
May 29, 2011 14:33
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 23:24 |
|
|
Elentor posted:
Zounds!! You lucky clodpole!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2011 00:30
|
|
|
FinalSin posted:doll question I believe there actually is a potential explanation for why that doll is there in the room, but it would be a spoiler to discuss it. (We can talk about it later.)
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2011 02:16
|
|
|
Guys, guys. We just saw the Wall Market sequence, which is one of the best things ever to be in any video game, much less any Final Fantasy game, and all you can talk about is OTHER FINAL FANTASIES? Even when I was a kid, I remember my first reaction to this area was "I cannot believe they are getting away with this poo poo in a video game". I had been impressed when the Nintendo version of Ultima 4 had toilets in it. Toilets! And yet here is Final Fantasy with gay sex in a brothel in the red-light district followed by the protagonist dressing as a woman and almost getting date-raped by the creepiest boss in the world, FOLLOWED BY repeated threats against said boss's genitals. If the entire game had been this audacious, nobody would argue about how good it was.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2011 05:12
|
|
|
DirtyPatty posted:Also, either we need to see more Tifa character development or I need to kick my younger self in the rear end for liking her more than Aeris back in the day. In my defense, I think the reasoning I used to determine my favorite back then wasn't so much which of the girls had the more interesting personality,it was more Tifa has bigger boobies she's obviously the more interesting one. They're only polygons 13 year old me get over it. Tifa gets more character development as the game goes on. I don't want to get into spoiler territory, but there's a certain point past which she starts being a much more interesting character. I liked her better than Aeris when I was a kid too, in the long run. (Admittedly part of that was due to the fact that she was demolishing monsters with her bare hands, which kind of distracted me from her actual character in these early bits.)
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2011 05:46
|
|
|
Magic in WoW can't be blocked, dodged, or parried, though (which also makes sense). That's why they need more hit rating than melee - because melee players have to stack a /different/ stat that lets them reduce the chance of their target dodging or parrying their attacks, and the devs are trying not to screw either side. That's why it doesn't apply as much to single-player games like the various good Final Fantasies - the developers don't have to worry as much about screwing a whole population of users who will send them angry e-mail. (Although if they make magic too useless I'm sure they get e-mail from people who are angry they can't play the magic users effectively in the game.)
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2011 16:02
|
|
|
Starhawk64 posted:Whoops, sorry about that, fixed it. I thought there might be someone who hasn't played this game up to that point, and just covering my bases. You didn't fix it; you broke it worse. The rule from the OP is no spoilers at all.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2011 18:43
|
|
|
I think "settle" is just an awkward translation here. What's going on is that the Cetra are a nomadic people, and some part of them decided to stop migrating. Most likely this is a parallel to our history: if you want to maintain a growing population, at a certain point you engage in agriculture, which prevents you from migrating and ties you to one spot. That's the beginning of civilization. The humans in the setting are descended from the people that stopped moving and built cities, and the ancients are descended from the tribes that continued to be nomads. As in the real world, modern life is not kind to the nomads. The reason for their weird powers is probably just that: they kept listening to the planet. Being nomadic means they're relying on the planet to bring them what they need, their numbers will be small, and never staying in one place means they won't exhaust the resources there. They're working the way the planet wants animals to work. Whereas the humans decided to control the planet instead; they planted their own crops and did all those things civilized people do, and in return they lost the relationship with the planet that they used to have.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2011 17:40
|
|
|
Yeah, I think this was deliberately set up as an anti-climax. You have the hero and the villain confronting each other dramatically, and then... nothing. Time to get back to wandering around the overworld map!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2011 03:53
|
|
|
Detective... JOE, you say?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2012 01:21
|
|
|
Magil of Shadow posted:Reminds me of some MMO story I heard, I think it was Everquest, but correct me if I'm wrong, where a team of players banded together to kill some dragon that was supposed to be unkillable. From what I remember, after they did this, Sony killed the entire group off right as it was about to die, banned the lot of them, then patched in even more health or regen or the like. Yeah, this also happened in Everquest, sort of. It was a dragon called Kerafyrm The Sleeper that only spawns once per server. After he gets woken up he runs around killing people for a while and is supposed to be invincible, but the devs didn't make him /really/ invincible, they just gave him a poo poo-ton of health. A group of guilds got about two hundred people together and beat the hell out of him anyway, and Sony stopped them when he was at about 25% health and despawned the boss. Later on they apologized and let them try again, and they beat him again. Nobody got banned for that one. Keep in mind that this dude has multiple instant-death spells, so the "fight" basically involved them throwing people at him endlessly while frantically resurrecting dead people faster than he could kill them again.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2012 21:17
|
|
|
He's not much of a man by the light of day, but by night he does a hell of a lot of squat thrusts.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2012 02:28
|
|
|
And now, many hours into the game, it becomes clear why the official logo for FF7 is a giant meteor. When I watched the end sequence for the first time, my thought process was just "gently caress you, Cait Sith, just get it over with and die already. I hate you so much." Somehow, I failed to empathize with the traitorbot who was simultaneously the most annoying character.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2012 02:26
|
|
|
I was seriously shocked here as a lad. It was amazing.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2012 03:44
|
|
|
The energy in the lifestream is necessary for the health of the planet, but that doesn't mean that getting injected with a large quantity of concentrated lifestream energy is a good idea. You're basically cramming a person's body full of more soul-juice than it was designed to carry around, which could have some pretty terrible side effects.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2012 07:22
|
|
|
I'm fairly certain it's a translation thing. Yuffie talks about the motion sickness before but Cloud can't comfort her because he can't admit his own weakness. Right here is the first spot that it makes sense plotwise for him to have this conversation. I always thought it was a neat moment, because now that he's willing to acknowledge his own problems he actually becomes better at solving other peoples'.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2013 17:45
|
|
|
I just used a turbo-ether in Bravely Default because I didn't want to lose my one-turn victory streak and laying down a bunch of high-damage spells was the only way to do that. I'm kind of proud of myself for doing that after years of useless item-hoarding.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2014 14:48
|
|
|
Tifa was designed by like four people working together, so my bet is that even if one of them thought she was supposed to be a C cup the others had different ideas. There are plenty of women in this game that do not have ridiculously huge breasts; blaming it on the rendering engine feels a bit disingenuous.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2014 05:17
|
|
|
Rita Repulsa posted:In jrpgs unless you're playing a mario rpg everything that is not your command is a die roll, that's why fedules comment about automation does not apply to fps's and other twitch games. It's just a different skillset that's being tested, assuming the design is right. Your reflexes are tested by twitch games and, in theory, your strategic and problem-solving abilities are tested by RPGs. Automating the strategic tests doesn't make any more sense than automating the reflex tests. Testing our abilities is a big part of what games are about, after all. (There's also the interactive story thing, but that's a whole other ball of wax.) Twiddy posted:Literally letting the game micromanage the tedious nuances while you handle the important decisions in real time flows so well it's amazing. Basically, almost everything in the main storyline is boring, easy, and mindless. The Marks and optional bosses are what make the game. This right here is the problem. If your game is so boring that you literally need to write an AI so that it can partially play itself, your game is too boring. You need to solve that with fundamental process improvements, not paper over it. For instance, cut the number of random encounters by 3/4 and make each of them more challenging; that might be fun! Or do like Bravely Default and let you decide if you want to bother having random encounters at all, based on your XP/money/JP needs. Cool! Or, and I know this sounds crazy, make it turn-based so you don't have to pause every few seconds to issue orders to people who don't have their AI turned on. I know, I know, revolutionary concepts here.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2014 22:41
|
|
|
Rita Repulsa posted:"strategic test" and "twitch test" cannot be applied in the same way here. None of that makes automating the strategic test any better. It just means it's easier to look up on GameFAQs. Arguably automating the strategic test is worse, because that's something that you could eventually get even if your reflexes suck, whereas automating the reflex test might be necessary for some people even to progress. (See also: Luigi mode in New Super Mario Brothers Wii.) Rita Repulsa posted:And besides why is there no strategy in building an automated strategy? Because each fight should present unique challenges, so writing a script capable of handling every fight would have to allow you to say something like this: code:If your fights are so similar that you can cover them all with a handful of simple strategies, all that means is that your fights suck. Rita Repulsa posted:Again, I keep hearing XIII "has a good battle system" and XII "plays itself" and XIII you don't even tell your guys directly what to do, just the gist of it like "you'll be the applying debuffs guy" or "you'll be the tank" instead of writing a list of conditionals. For reference, I don't like XIII's battle system either, or at least what I've seen of it through the current LP. It has some cool ideas in it, but where it falls down is exactly this. I don't WANT an AI controlling my guys. I want to do that. That's what playing a game is! Rita Repulsa posted:have you seen the minecraft modding scene? Sure, and that's a whole different thing: 1) Unmodded Minecraft players are still by far the majority, so the gameplay you're referring to as tedious is what most people do and enjoy pretty much their whole time with the game. 2) You don't start with the high-level decisions, you start with the low-level ones, and you never lose the ability to make them. If I want to go back to cooking my ore with charcoal instead of pulverizing it, nothing prevents me from doing that, unlike the FF12/FF13 paradigm which basically requires me to automate my guys to progress. 3) Most of the time, automating the setup is the point, because Minecraft is a game about building cool things. Once you have built your orbital laser that gives you free ore forever and put together a little base with an automated cow-killing cookery, most people lose interest. Creating the automation is the point and the challenge, and requires the lion's share of the time, unlike FF12 where the majority of the time is spent watching your pre-arranged scripts play out. 4) We're talking about fundamentally different gameplay goals. In Minecraft, you're basically creating art, and the zombies are just there to make that harder. Some people turn on Creative mode and ignore them completely, and why not? In Final Fantasy, the only game content is the fights, along with an occasional minigame, so by automating the fights you are literally removing the gameplay. Rita Repulsa posted:What they were aiming for - a real time fast paced rpg combat system where there's still some of the usual jrpg strategy - wouldn't adapt to most of this. I agree with this completely. And that's the issue. They didn't do what they were trying to do badly, they just tried to do the wrong thing to begin with. Especially for a Final Fantasy game. It's like all those horrible X-Com "sequels" we got saddled with before someone realized that what X-Com players actually wanted was Enemy Unknown. Interceptor and Enforcer were never going to be good games anyway, but maybe they would have had a chance if they hadn't been released as X-Com games. Similarly, FF12 might have been more tolerable if it had been a side-game or a whole other IP. Rita Repulsa posted:FFXII may not have been the perfect battle system, but I do not think gambits are a fundamentally bad idea. Perhaps requiring them outside of special "challenge" battles or something was so that if you bought the game to play something like ffiv through ffix with a different story then you could, and have some other gimmicks involved. Or ranking battles/dungeons with a highest rank only achievable with the speed gambits give so that if you wanted to be the puppetmaster orchastrating the master strategy you could show what you're made of. See, my solution in the first case would be "remove all of the non-challenge battles". If they're so boring you want to automate them, just get rid of them. The second case would be workable, though, because then it makes the gambit system something you can use to optimize rather than something you are forced to use to play the game, which means people who enjoy it can use it without interfering with core gameplay.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2014 00:34
|
|
|
KataraniSword posted:There has not been a single main-numbered Final Fantasy game that made battles interesting. FillInTheBlank posted:Menu based RPGs just become mash X to continually attack and win which is no better than what you claim 12 entirely consists of. Yeah, I disagree with this stuff. I think it's mostly a matter of more recent Final Fantasies, which genuinely do have this problem, obscuring the older ones. Final Fantasy IV didn't dick around with enemies, especially if you played the non-easytype version. Conditions were a huge help. FFVI had some genuinely hard parts until you noticed the bugs and exploitable stuff. (See also: offering + genji glove combo.) In general, if you can get through an RPG by just mashing the X button to fight, it's badly balanced or else you spent a lot of time up front grinding. What used to be the case is that the waves of random encounters were meant to make you decide how to spend strategic resources. Do I use my MP now or later? Do I have enough to get down the hall and get that extra chest or should I skip it and plunge ahead? Maybe I need to turn back and gain a couple of levels to try this again? Tightening up your strategy against individual fights meant you could afford to stay in the dungeon longer. But gradually we started to get more ways to recover and rest, and the random fights started to seem more pointless... which they were, by then. They're mostly held onto because of tradition, although some clever uses of them have shown up (teaching you how to fight the bosses, for instance; that comes up a few times in FFX). Schwartzcough posted:I don't understand these sort of arguments from menu-based RPG fans. People say they'd rather put in every command themselves than have anything automated, but if it can be automated it's too boring to include at all. So... you wish RPGs just didn't have any battles? Those are called visual novels. With enough resources, any game can be automated. Take a look at all the things people do with "tool-assisted" speedruns. The type of game doesn't even matter. People have raised automating things like Super Mario to an art form. The question is not whether it can be automated, it's whether you wish it were automated. My argument is just that if you find yourself playing a game, and think "wow, it would be great if this game played itself because otherwise this part is just super boring", the best way to fix that problem is probably not to actually let the game play itself. What I want are battles that are fun to play. Even fun battles could still be scripted by some AI if the designers put one in, sure. I could have the computer play chess against itself too, but that wouldn't be as much fun as actually playing chess with it. Schwartzcough posted:And with almost every RPG, you're going to have some simple command priority structure you use, even if it's just "Revive dead characters. If doing nothing else, then attack." XII lets you automate as much or as little as you like. There's really no difference between using "Wait" mode to freeze battles and input commands than there is with the older FF games where you wait for turns to come up to enter commands. There are a couple of very important differences. First, the game is designed around the idea that you're using gambits, so the majority of the battles are boring as hell. The game doesn't expect you to actually play them, so why spend the effort making them interesting? And you have to do a ton of them, too, assuming you want to do any of the "collect ten foozle pelt" things you're continually peppered with. There are only a handful of genuinely interesting fights. Second, you can only control one character at a time and their actions never, ever synch up exactly, even when using wait mode. If you don't set up at least some basic gambits, whoever you're not controlling sits around with their thumb up their rear end with a cactus man shooting needles into them until you switch over and tell them to hit him, which makes the already-boring battles draw out unmercifully. The game is pretty clear with you that they want you to use gambits and if you aren't, you're doing it wrong. Which makes it a false choice; if you hate gambits, you're just not going to have a lot of fun playing twelve.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2014 07:24
|
|
|
CmdrKing posted:In that respect, as someone else mentioned, Bravely Default is the model I'd really like to see; if I want to rush through a part of the game, encounters off. If I'm getting my rear end kicked or need to get new gear, double encounter rate. Mind you... random battles in Bravely Default are actually reasonably strong and tend to kill the poo poo out of you if you gently caress around and let them get turns, just due to how BD works you generally won't let randoms get turns after you've fought them once and know their weaknesses. That was me, actually. Bravely Default is pretty much what I want out of a Final Fantasy game. It does innovative things with the turn-based job-driven JRPG formula without chucking the baby out with the bathwater. It's not completely grind-free, but I don't expect anything to actually achieve that goal (only to work towards it), and the grinding is pretty much always under your control. Schwartzcough posted:Using FFVI as an example of "hard" is really stretching. That game is easy even without using any of the bugs or "exploitable stuff" (unless you count "blitzes" and "magic" as exploitable stuff). The game as a whole isn't hard, there are just some hard fights in it. I see 6 as the point at which they started to ease back on the difficulty, probably as part of an attempt to draw more people in, which is fine as long as it's still fun. (And fights in 6 were fun, even if by the end it boiled down to "how quickly can you ridiculously humiliate this boss".) Keep in mind my goal here is "fun", not "hard" - making encounters complicated and difficult is one way of getting fun, as long as they aren't so crazy difficult that people literally can't do them, but there are other ways. Schwartzcough posted:Er, tool-assisted speed runs aren't "automated." They allow a player to advance the game frame-by-frame to make split-second perfect moves and responses. It's not like a computer is just playing it on its own. (Edit- ok, I concede that sometimes programs are used to get computers to simply try all button presses looking for an optimal result, but those are relatively rare). And similarly here, it's not like you turn the game on and watch it go- YOU have to specifically direct your team what to do. How well or poorly you do is based on your own planning and coordination. There's typically plenty for you to do manually during harder fights, and even easier fights tend to have things for you to do manually. You could say that was an advantage of having gambits slowly doled out- it makes you do some things manually. But personally I (and it seems most people, based on how people don't like the gambits being parceled out in the vanilla game) actually enjoy setting up good strategies and having things go pretty smoothly without having to cast spells all the time yourself. On tool-assisted runs, I wasn't saying they were bad things, they're just examples of how to automate play. They can go, as you say, right up from letting people take five seconds to input a command that normally would be done in one tenth of a second to pressing the buttons automatically for you without your intervention. I'm providing this as evidence that anything can be automated, which means that "play that can't be automated" isn't a reasonable goal to shoot for in any game, and isn't the goal I'm advocating. The actual goal is play you don't want to automate, because it's more fun not to. Most people do not use an AI to play Mario for them the first time they do it. What I see happening in FF12 and FF13 is an AI being forcibly attached to characters to solve the problem of the fights being boring and impossible to manage. That just seems like the wrong way to solve the problem. Now, if you have interesting fights, but you put a gambit system in anyway, there's nothing wrong with that. That's kind of what the Dragon Quest series does for every game after 4 - there's an AI option you can set on for any character with a bunch of pre-built strategies if you don't really want to play them for whatever reason. And that's cool, because the game isn't designed around it and you never have to use it. I don't understand why someone would want to automate an interesting fight, but if someone does, it doesn't hurt me any to let them do it. But that isn't what we're talking about here; FF12 pretends to give you the option of skipping gambits, but doesn't, and FF13 doesn't even have the pretense. That's the part that drives me up the wall; the AI isn't an optional thing you can use if you find it fun, it's something you are forced to use just to play the game normally because under the wallpaper of AI-controlled battles is a yawning crevice of tedium. Schwartzcough posted:But there aren't any "collect 10 foozle pelt" quests? There's the bazaar, which has completely optional things that by and large don't take a lot of grinding- it's designed so that you can get good stuff really early if you know where to hunt for rare materials, or those materials will be readily available later on when the equipment isn't as impressive. It has some late-game items that can be harder to get, but that's not really any different from collecting pink tails or economizers or whatever in previous games. The bazaar is, indeed, part of what I'm referring to. And it may be possible we just have different tolerances for grinding here. Schwartzcough posted:And see, you say "it's designed around gambits, so the battles are boring as hell. You're not expected to play them", but honestly, what really separates inputting commands for the characters for each battle from battles in previous FF games? I don't think the average monster takes any more attacks to kill. You can only control one character at a time, true- but how is that different from previous games? You could only input commands for one character at a time. ATB bars filling up didn't conveniently time themselves to "synch up exactly" in previous games- if somebody's bar filled when you where controlling another character, they just had to sit and wait for you to get to them. I think gambits just show you how fast battles CAN go if you pre-program your battle plan ahead of time, and suddenly controlling one character at a time, command by command (like the old games!) feels slow and awkward. Because they WERE. What really separates them is that in the older final fantasies, desynchronization isn't generally working against you. How about this: in a turn-based game, the turns are happening sequentially and you're controlling them sequentially. In a real-time game, the turns are happening simultaneously but you can't control them simultaneously. It is physically impossible to do that. It is totally different because of basic facts about human physiology and the nature of controllers. That's what necessitates things like the gambit system, because you need to have something telling party members B and C what to do while your attention is devoted to A, otherwise they aren't contributing to the fight at all. In a turn-based game, they are always contributing to the fight to the maximum extent that they can, because they only have the option of doing so when it's their turn, and everything is balanced around that. They could partially solve this by making attacks take so long that effectively you're never in a position to give orders to more than one person at a time (which is a pretty common solution to that problem, and there are certain occasions where it felt that way in FF12, for sure), but even then the monsters aren't playing by those rules; they'll just attack you whenever they feel like it, sometimes all at the same time. If you want to boil the difference down to one word, it's simultaneity. I have yet to see anyone solve this problem for tactical team-based combat in a reasonable way, although I'd be very interested to see it done. In terms of personal reactions, I actually found FF12 felt pretty slow and awkward, in fact, for this exact reason. Because I tried to control everyone, and it was like playing whack-a-mole with oven mitts on, and everything took twice as long to do as in, say, FF10. Eventually I had to resort to gambits (or long quickening chains, and don't even get me started on long cinematics with quicktime events in them in the middle of fights) just to get through the battles in a reasonable amount of time. And the more I used gambits, the less I was doing in encounters, which made them quicker but more boring. So it was this kind of see-saw that needed to be balanced to minimize the boredom so I could see what happened in the next cutscene. That's not really the kind of choice you should be obligated to make in a game. Schwartzcough posted:I think I had more fun with the battles in XII than any other game in the series, so I guess tastes just differ. Sure. Everyone's going to like different stuff; it's just my opinion is that, really, it's bad design overall to require this mechanic to get through the game, that overall "less tedium" would be more fun for a greater number of people than "more automation of tedious things". That doesn't mean some people aren't going to enjoy it, and, again, if it were really optional and the game weren't balanced around everyone using gambits, I wouldn't give a poo poo if they were included so that those people can have fun too. If you implement a system competently, there's always going to be someone out there who likes it. I mean, there are people out there who like Final Fantasy 8, for heaven's sake. idonotlikepeas fucked around with this message at 18:47 on May 6, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 6, 2014 15:17
|
|
|
Low-level games can be done without level grinding, but they generally involve similar quantities of tedium. (Restart this battle over and over while stealing one item and running away to make money/have useful items, carefully edge your way around this fight you can't deal with, use an exploit to get through a wall to cut off a section of the game, run the same combo of abilities 14923 times doing one damage to the boss each time, etc.) Those things aren't LEVEL grinding, but they do feel an awful lot like grinding. They also generally require you to have an in-depth knowledge of the game that your random first-time player is unlikely to have. Even with FF8, where being low-level is actually helpful, someone just playing the game for the first time is unlikely to realize it or understand how the game mechanics work to the extent necessary to exploit it. LLGs are cool, but they only appeal to a very narrow subset of the people who play games, in general. So, yeah, it's totally possible for a game to be beatable with low-level characters but still require your average person to grind to finish.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2014 15:42
|
|
|
FF4 had a really strong sense of story that was unusual for games at the time; the story generally took center stage and everything else revolved around it. The characters were fairly strong too, or at least memorable, despite there being a number of them. (One of the few objections I have to FF6 is that there are so many that some of them tend to get lost beyond their 1-2 plot-relevant sidequests.)
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2015 18:10
|
|
|
The point is more that running away or otherwise avoiding gaining XP in every battle is incentivized, and not in a way that makes for an interesting story. (I could see that; imagine a game in which not killing everything was a good idea from a plot perspective and running away from fights was more interesting than mashing a single button...) The fact that you can ignore the incentives the game provides and do something different doesn't mean it's a good idea to provide those incentives in the first place.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2015 18:53
|
|
|
Invisible, Inc, too. But not any Final Fantasy game.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2015 19:16
|
|
|
Gnoman posted:It really isn't - higher level enemies provide you with much more powerful spells to Draw and drop items that can be refined into more powerful spells. These more powerful spells bump your stats up much more than the enemy scaling improves the enemies. The game is easiest if you run right off to the Island Closest to Heaven/Hell at the first opportunity and level to 100. I suppose there may be break-points in the game where this isn't true for a couple of levels, but as a general rule Levels Are Good in FF8 despite superficially appearing to not be. You only ever need to encounter one monster that has a spell to draw full stacks of it for everyone. (Another issue with the game's incentives, in fact, because what it means is that the most efficient way of using a new enemy is keeping it alive while you boringly draw magic out of it for many, many rounds and then not killing it.) Plus with the card game and the draw spots, there are only a handful of spells you ever are absolutely required to draw from enemies in the first place. And if you keep enemy levels low, you never need those powerful spell ranks anyway. So, yeah, while it might be that the curve falls apart at the other end too, just staying at the lowest possible levels is probably the easiest path for most people. What the worst path is is the one most RPG fans are used to, which is pausing periodically to grind in ordinary areas if you feel like you're having trouble with anything while still being in the midlevel range, since unless you know what you're doing that's likely to be counterproductive. I don't think the creators of FF8 intentionally set out to create a system that made levelling bad. If they had, they would have put more effort into informing you of that through the game somehow. They did it by accident while trying to experiment with new mechanics. And I can respect the desire to experiment! It just didn't work out so well that time.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2015 00:13
|
|
|
DQ4 was absolutely amazing, but it suffered from a few technical issues and, as is usual for Dragon Quest, took a somewhat more whimsical approach even to the nastier parts of the story. Still one of the best Dragon Quest games, though.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2015 03:15
|
|
|
The White Dragon posted:The way you're supposed to fight the Veteran in the final dungeon, afaik, is just get strong enough to damage race him, or possibly kill one character and keep reviving them to make him reset Doom. The problem with that is, you can't always get the item out before the timer runs out. Instead, I decided I would finally make those two spells that don't do anything, Slow and Stop, work for me and cast it on my own party members to slow the doom timer on the guy using the item, or stop it to make sure I always had someone in reserve to revive in case my slowed character still wasn't able to get the Phoenix Down off. I did the same thing when I was a lad. I think I died to that boss a dozen times before working that out.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2015 03:33
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 23:24 |
|
|
Kanfy posted:Now if this was about Rufus instead, I'd totally agree. Rufus being alive is the single dumbest thing in that movie. ...Yes, I am aware of the enormity of that statement.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2015 22:50
|
|