So school me on Vagrant Story.

[LostTemplar]

Such a big change in game design seems a little out of place for a franchise name continuation.

Let's just say that this is the only statement that matters here.

[Garoth Moulinoski]

Since I'm just a demon, maybe let's take someone else's opinion as to why what I'm talking about is a problem.

http://extra-credits.net/episodes/game-reviews/

No one is saying you're a demon... You shouldn't take it so personally...

And how many people end up truly agreeing with a lot of professional critics?

[Talbain]

Still off-topic and missing the point

I've been aware of what the point is the whole time, I just don't care to discuss save coins in a game, because discussing them with no context is meaningless.  What's worse, Dank is taking their negative opinions of the system and conflating them because of their opinions, which strays away from either--the save coins themselves, supposedly what we're talking about or--the actual heart of the matter, which is that a review isn't about whether or not save coins are or aren't a useful as a system, but what the context within which makes of them.
May 10, 2012, 10:01:37 am - (Auto Merged - Double Posts are not allowed before 7 days.)

No one is saying you're a demon... You shouldn't take it so personally...

Was being facetious...

[DankPanties]

I just don't care to discuss save coins in a game, because discussing them with no context is meaningless

I will refrain from judging it any further until I actually get around to playing it someday

So can we get back to talking about Vagrant Story again?

I put two more hours into it last night, with the night before that makes three hours.  It's actually better than I remember it.  Looking forward to beating it this time for sure.  I obviously wasn't paying enough attention years back, as last night I realized the game has a beastiary, which I had always missed before somehow.  I LOVE THIS GAME.

I've read if you restart the game as New Game+ you can get to a bonus dungeon.  Does anyone know anything about that?  How it's accessible, or what it's about?  Sans-plot-spoilers of course.

[Talbain]

And how many people end up truly agreeing with a lot of professional critics?

I'm not necessarily sure it's so much about agreeing with them as it is about how many would be willing to defend that critic's opinion.  And of the more respected critics, there are many who would do so.  It's far less established in realms of critique for videogames, however.

Also, Dank:  The whole save coin thing is more my objection to using a game review as a place to acquire facts about a game in the first place.  Those sorts of things are far more suited to guidebooks or press releases than reviews, as a review is, by definition, an opinion piece, meaning that even the factual bits should likely be considered as opinion within the context in which they are written.  As an example, if a film or game reviewer talks about a piece as being "unnecessarily long," put in the context of a review this may mean that it "feels long to them", and may not in fact be overly long--for example, if the film was only an hour and a half or the game could be beaten in a day.  This is my problem with citing a game review as though it were a source of factual information.

[Garoth Moulinoski]

I'm not necessarily sure it's so much about agreeing with them as it is about how many would be willing to defend that critic's opinion.  And of the more respected critics, there are many who would do so.  It's far less established in realms of critique for videogames, however.

Also, Dank:  The whole save coin thing is more my objection to using a game review as a place to acquire facts about a game in the first place.  Those sorts of things are far more suited to guidebooks or press releases than reviews, as a review is, by definition, an opinion piece, meaning that even the factual bits should likely be considered as opinion within the context in which they are written.  As an example, if a film or game reviewer talks about a piece as being "unnecessarily long," put in the context of a review this may mean that it "feels long to them", and may not in fact be overly long--for example, if the film was only an hour and a half or the game could be beaten in a day.  This is my problem with citing a game review as though it were a source of factual information.

Have you ever had a friend recommend something for you? Or tell you not to waste your time on something?

You might listen to them, or you might ignore what they said, all depending on what you hear and your biases. Reading reviews are a lot getting an instant friend telling you what they felt about something. It's not factual, no one claimed it is, but it's still something someone noticed about a work.

I normally try to read at least one positive and one negative review about anything I look up. I then make a decision based on which reviews sound more in tune to my biases.

[DankPanties]

As an example, if a film or game reviewer talks about a piece as being "unnecessarily long," put in the context of a review this may mean that it "feels long to them"

Yes, something like that is based on subjective opinion.

But if the same film reviewer said "this film stars Brad Pitt" that wouldn't be an opinion, it would be a fact.  So in that sense, you got a piece of factual evidence from the review.

Thereby, me point to the save coins as an existing element is still based on the fact that BOFV does indeed use save coins, a fact I learned from a review.

[Talbain]

Yes, something like that is based on subjective opinion.

But if the same film reviewer said "this film stars Brad Pitt" that wouldn't be an opinion, it would be a fact.  So in that sense, you got a piece of factual evidence from the review.

Thereby, me point to the save coins as an existing element is still based on the fact that BOFV does indeed use save coins, a fact I learned from a review.

And I think that's cool.  However, what I'm not really fond of is a person calling a fact "lame" with no context.  If the only point was to illustrate that you found facts from a review, there's not really a need to include the criticisms as well, unless there was some reason to do so.  You could just say, I found out that there were save coins from a review and I don't really understand/like that.  I guess it seems a bit oddly verbose if the only purpose of it was to just include facts.  I mean, you could also get all those facts from any other number of sources, so I'm a little bit curious as to why you chose a review.  I certainly don't go looking at reviews for facts, but rather for their opinions on the peculiarities of the piece and how it may/may not relate to my tastes.

If I just want facts, well, there's iMDB or GameFAQs.
May 10, 2012, 10:56:22 am - (Auto Merged - Double Posts are not allowed before 7 days.)

Have you ever had a friend recommend something for you? Or tell you not to waste your time on something?

You might listen to them, or you might ignore what they said, all depending on what you hear and your biases. Reading reviews are a lot getting an instant friend telling you what they felt about something. It's not factual, no one claimed it is, but it's still something someone noticed about a work.

I normally try to read at least one positive and one negative review about anything I look up. I then make a decision based on which reviews sound more in tune to my biases.

Eh, I don't really consider reviewers in the same light as my friends.  They're considerably farther away than that.  I consider them story tellers, and how good they tell their stories builds or loses my interest in something, as well as how close to an actual representation of the piece they're reviewing actually was if I went to play the piece/watch the film/read the book/etc.

[DankPanties]

You could just say, I found out that there were save coins from a review and I don't really understand/like that.

If you go back and reread my earlier posts... I already mentioned earlier why I didn't edit that quote.  And the guy calling the game lame, mentioned plenty of reasons why he thought it was before he did so.  He's allowed to think as such if he wishes.  Just as you are allowed to not think as such.  Either opinion doesn't make either one of you more or less intelligent, just different types of gamers.

And we are really sinking into a quagmire of pedantry here, are we not?

Overall I think you are saying you really enjoy BOFV for daring to be different, and for not being afraid to discipline the player to make them a better player.  The same things you enjoy about Dark Souls, no?  If that is the case, I comprehend your love for both.  Simultaneously, I can understand why other players would be miffed at the game for being so different than its predecessors.

[SargeSmash]

Thread explosion.

Anyway...  just a quick chime-in:  Dead Rising also put this mechanic to use.  The only difference there is it's an action game, and it has zombies.  (Which, admittedly, is a pretty big difference, but the underlying conceit is still there.)

I'd also like to point out, as per Vagrant Story:  it has always annoyed me that some folks drew (and still draw) parallels between it and Final Fantasy XII.  Just...  no.  In my mind, Vagrant Story is much more competently executed.

[DankPanties]

some folks drew (and still draw) parallels between it and Final Fantasy XII

I would imagine that has more to do with the art style than anything else?

That game is certainly another quite divisive one.  I do look forward to experiencing it at some point.

[Talbain]

If you go back and reread my earlier posts... I already mentioned earlier why I didn't edit that quote.  And the guy calling the game lame, mentioned plenty of reasons why he thought it was before he did so.  He's allowed to think as such if he wishes.  Just as you are allowed to not think as such.  Either opinion doesn't make either one of you more or less intelligent, just different types of gamers.

Yes, I suppose I shouldn't question his intelligence, but his writing is clearly juvenile (assuming it's a him).

And we are really sinking into a quagmire of pedantry here, are we not?

Yes, so I'll stop after this, me and Kaio tend to do this little dance from time to time.

Overall I think you are saying you really enjoy BOFV for daring to be different, and for not being afraid to discipline the player to make them a better player.  The same things you enjoy about Dark Souls, no?  If that is the case, I comprehend your love for both.  Simultaneously, I can understand why other players would be miffed at the game for being so different than its predecessors.

More or less.
May 10, 2012, 11:15:50 am - (Auto Merged - Double Posts are not allowed before 7 days.)

I'd also like to point out, as per Vagrant Story:  it has always annoyed me that some folks drew (and still draw) parallels between it and Final Fantasy XII.  Just...  no.  In my mind, Vagrant Story is much more competently executed.

I dunno, I think that Final Fantasy XII is competently executed, but unfortunately a somewhat notorious victim of marketing.  It's probably the best evolution of a jRPG that's come before or since.  I certainly would be ecstatic if they announced they were dropping the FFXIII system in favor of the FFXII system.

Its relationship to Vagrant Story is tenuous however, and mostly relates to the art style, which is obvious.

[FallenAngel2387]

"So school me on Vagrant Story"

You missed out on a PS1 RPG. Ob-La-Di Ob-La-Da, life goes on.

Class dismissed.

[SargeSmash]

There is some interesting stuff there...  but it feels like a single-player MMO.  And the balance feels off, and the whole thing feels slower than something like Xenoblade.  At least that game sees battles moving briskly.  Then the stupid License system.  Gah, that was a terrible idea.  And honestly, if people complained about lack of control in FFXIII, they should really gripe about FFXII, as the crux of the game is the Gambit system, in which you basically piece together your party members' AI yourself.

I mean, I can see where the interest could be there.  I put 30 hours into it, for crying out loud.  And there are periods where it's great fun.  But the pacing is all wrong, and while the story is interesting, that pacing just ruins things for me.  And I always feel like I'm not playing the game right.  It's disconcerting.  At least with something like KOTOR, I feel like I'm progressing appreciably.

[LostTemplar]

I loved FF12's gameplay. It's like everything I would love about MMORPGs (sans the multiplayer, obviously). Just without the tediousness.

Anyway, you're making me want to play Vagrant Story as well. Maybe I'll give it a try when I finish my current games.

[DankPanties]

Then the stupid License system.  Gah, that was a terrible idea.

There is the International version of the game (which you can find an English text hack version of on the net), which includes 12 license boards based on the Zodiac, as opposed to just one board like the USA version, plus myriad other changes.  I have NO IDEA if this makes things better or not.  It would be interesting to hear from someone who has tried this version of the game.  From Wikipedia:

"An international version of the game called Final Fantasy XII International Zodiac Job System was announced on May 10, 2007.[101] It would be released in Japan on August 9, 2007 as part of both Final Fantasy 20th anniversary and Ivalice Alliance.[102] The game includes twelve License Boards available (instead of the original one), each corresponding to a different Zodiac sign and job. The battle system as a whole has been tweaked; guest characters and summons are controllable by the player, and holding the L1 button doubles the game's running speed. Additionally, the game features the English voices and the widescreen 16:9 ratio support of the North American version, along with a bonus disc based on the one initially released with the North American version. There is also a "New Game+" option, "New Game- (minus)" (where characters do not gain experience), and a "Trial Mode" which allows the player to hunt monsters in 100 different maps to gain items and money."

[Talbain]

There is some interesting stuff there...  but it feels like a single-player MMO.  And the balance feels off, and the whole thing feels slower than something like Xenoblade.  At least that game sees battles moving briskly.  Then the stupid License system.  Gah, that was a terrible idea.  And honestly, if people complained about lack of control in FFXIII, they should really gripe about FFXII, as the crux of the game is the Gambit system, in which you basically piece together your party members' AI yourself.

I mean, I can see where the interest could be there.  I put 30 hours into it, for crying out loud.  And there are periods where it's great fun.  But the pacing is all wrong, and while the story is interesting, that pacing just ruins things for me.  And I always feel like I'm not playing the game right.  It's disconcerting.  At least with something like KOTOR, I feel like I'm progressing appreciably.

Well, for one, the Zodiac Job System version of the game is the only way to play it.  The original is kinda garbage as far as the License System is concerned.  I frankly loved piecing together AI, because realistically what you were doing in every Final Fantasy since the first one, was just that.  It's just that you were doing all the inputs manually, and it was a huge pain in the ass that took away time from actually playing the game.

I wasn't so concerned with the pacing, the pacing was ok, not great.  The plot could have been a lot more interesting if Vaan and Penelo weren't in the picture.  I'm still somewhat convinced that it was those two characters that ruined the game, largely because they dilute the focus of what's occurring in the game world.  As for playing the game right, I can't really respond to that.  I never felt like I was playing the game wrong, though I do recall sometimes being bored until the later hunts in the game because the game itself was too easy (which didn't really need to be the case).

[Garoth Moulinoski]

Thread explosion.

Anyway...  just a quick chime-in:  Dead Rising also put this mechanic to use.  The only difference there is it's an action game, and it has zombies.  (Which, admittedly, is a pretty big difference, but the underlying conceit is still there.)

I'd also like to point out, as per Vagrant Story:  it has always annoyed me that some folks drew (and still draw) parallels between it and Final Fantasy XII.  Just...  no.  In my mind, Vagrant Story is much more competently executed.

Isn't Vagrant Story supposed to take place in Ivalice? That is what I read a long time ago... that whole Ivalice Alliance thing...

[DankPanties]

Not according to Matsuno:

http://twitter.com/#!/YasumiMatsuno/status/85846703474872321

While I'm mentioning him, apparently Guild01 will be his first directed game since 2000:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guild_01

The Crimson Shroud portion at least.

[Garoth Moulinoski]

Not according to Matsuno:

http://twitter.com/#!/YasumiMatsuno/status/85846703474872321.

D'awww. "Please no flames for my bad English".

But, yeah, I see now. Meh, executive meddling then.