-
Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.
"This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.
Squeenix Final Fantasy 15
- Thread starter Nugs
- Start date
Wait.
RPGCodex reviews have to be "good enough" ?
This changes my plans of reviewing Shroud of the Avatar entirely.
RPGCodex reviews have to be "good enough" ?
This changes my plans of reviewing Shroud of the Avatar entirely.
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2015
- Messages
- 11,882
They have to be reviews of non-Japanese games.
So it turns out the version I downloaded doesn't come with the DLCs (I downloaded the 3DM version which was cracked using the demo exe), and the saves aren't transferable to the other versions that come with the DLC which means I'd have to start over.
I don't feel like starting over, plus I don't feel like downloading another 100 gbs and spending time installing the thing again so I wanted to ask:
Are the 3 character chapters (the DLCs) worth re-downloading the thing and starting over?
I don't feel like starting over, plus I don't feel like downloading another 100 gbs and spending time installing the thing again so I wanted to ask:
Are the 3 character chapters (the DLCs) worth re-downloading the thing and starting over?
Grampy_Bone
Arcane
They put those labyrinth of Tohou reviews up, and they are super-capital-J JRPGs.
I wouldn't bother with the DLCs they slot into the existing story and just pad it out.
I wouldn't bother with the DLCs they slot into the existing story and just pad it out.
Vorark
Erudite
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2017
- Messages
- 1,394
Misread it as "For most of the game, the goal is simply to get your car stronger so you can beat the Empire". Considering all the craziness that goes in modern FF, it isn't that far-fetched.
I might give the game a spin after SE is done patching, releases season pass #120 and bundles all the crap in FF XV Imperial Edition or whatever it'll be called.
ilitarist
Learned
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2016
- Messages
- 857
On lack of roleplaying: I feel open world helps with it. In a typical linear RPG you only affect the bloodthirstiness of your hero i.e. define how much he grinds and plays minigames while the world goes down in flames. Here you have a lot of sidequest activities. Your Noctis may care about photos and fishes, mine goes for hunter medals, someone else's gathers all the recipies in the land and goes out of his way to gather royal arms and clear every imperial base.
On action: since at least Final Fantasy 6 characters had special abilities requiring some quick input on your part even in basic combat. Sabin in FF6 had increasingly complex combos, don't remember FF7 well enough but FF8 certainly has a lot of time-dependent stuff, even squalls basic attack can be augmented by right timing.
FFXV is boring and I should've probably ignored open world altogether (not that I progressed that far) but I had more fun with it than with surprisingly similar Nier Automata. And I've finished it unlike FFXIII.
Machocruz
Arcane
One could argue that player skill weighs too much in an action combat system for you to be really RPing the character, but on the other hand these characters are meant to be flashy badasses in combat,. But on the other other hand, they should be badasses even if the player is pushing buttons with his nose or has arthritis. In the case of something like FFVI, if the character is still effective as they are presented to be even if you suck at the timing based stuff, you can still said to be 'authentically' RPing that character, with the only player skill being tactical decision making, which is a player skill you have to allow for in any RPG.
Machocruz
Arcane
Well I guess I can't say you aren't doing some RP in the game then. It passes the paraplegic test.
ilitarist
Learned
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2016
- Messages
- 857
Not the best roleplaying, but it has a lot of it. A lot of people highly regard Bethesda games as perfect RPG exactly in this sense - playground where you can define your character through his actions and subsequent goals you take. Any character or playthrough is as much defined by player choices in quests he does as by stuff he doesn't do. Even the fact that you don't actually need to do any open world stuff in FFXV to complete main quest plays into that thing. You don't do quests because you need to be on certain power level to win, you do it because you feel like it, or you think your personal Noctis should do it.
In your example of Halo or any other linear shooter you have a linear set of objectives so you can't choose there - but yes, those aspects can be used as extremely light RPG elements which I would define as "choice that has no clear answer and understood as such by the person making the choice". If it's not optimal/simple way to play the game then not using vehicles at all is an example of roleplaying, yeah. Doesn't mean those games are RPGs, of course, just as Skyrim is not FPS and Final Fantasy 7 is not a racing game.
ilitarist
Learned
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2016
- Messages
- 857
You're talking about other qualities. Reactivity. Challenge. It's important, of course, but the genre as a whole has huge problems with those things. As aweigh can testify you can only get a challenge in those RPGs that hardly have any roleplaying, like dungeon crawlers a la Wizardry, to win there you have to play a role of a desperate tactician drawing maps and calculating optimal builds. And reactivity you mostly get in immersive sims a la Deus Ex/Dishonored or roleplaying strategy games like Crusader Kings or - very rarely - systemic RPGs like Din's Curse or Space Rangers or even Sid Meier's Pirates! If you compare reactivity and challenge of Skyrim to, say, Planescape (or whatever good RPG you have in mind) then the difference is in the density of rails and branches in the world. It's pretty clear that as a game itself Skyrim has more reactivity than Planescape, but the game itself is much bigger and huge portion of it is dungeon crawling lacking any roleplaying choices or reaction to your behavior.
In first, say, 5 hours of Planescape you have maybe 20 quests available to you, 15 of them can be completed in 2 or 3 ways, but, say, only 2 of them are not self-contained and affect anything beyond those specific quests. Plus everything affects your morality score but it's hardly ever a good system, even Dragon Age companion relations is better and more nuanced, I'd say. In Skyrim you'll have access to most of the game content in first 5 hours minus level-locked quests and long questlines. It will be something like 100 quests maybe. Pretty sure that 20 of them will have varied ending giving you roleplaying options, and due to systemic nature of the game maybe half of those quests will have reprecussions for the whole game unlocking companions, spouses, friends in cities giving access to thane quest and so on and so on.
But beyond those quests - traditional RPG won't give you a lot of roleplaying choices outside of clearly defined crossroads. Most of players back in the day considered freedom to be an ability to kill any NPC and see if the world would react. Meanwhile in Skyrim many actions like stealing have repercussions: dudes are hired to beat you, friends can give you gifts, vampires kill your friend and you get inheritance and so on and so on. There are no big branching narratives but I'm sure you can see how those little things may be even more immersive compared to traditional RPG. That traditional RPG will never be able to give you enough freedom or react to all possible outcomes but Skyrim can amaze players by people telling them to stop fucking around when they jump on the table. FFXV clearly took that approach with a lot of reactions to little things and dozens of small self-contained quests with limited choices.
In first, say, 5 hours of Planescape you have maybe 20 quests available to you, 15 of them can be completed in 2 or 3 ways, but, say, only 2 of them are not self-contained and affect anything beyond those specific quests. Plus everything affects your morality score but it's hardly ever a good system, even Dragon Age companion relations is better and more nuanced, I'd say. In Skyrim you'll have access to most of the game content in first 5 hours minus level-locked quests and long questlines. It will be something like 100 quests maybe. Pretty sure that 20 of them will have varied ending giving you roleplaying options, and due to systemic nature of the game maybe half of those quests will have reprecussions for the whole game unlocking companions, spouses, friends in cities giving access to thane quest and so on and so on.
But beyond those quests - traditional RPG won't give you a lot of roleplaying choices outside of clearly defined crossroads. Most of players back in the day considered freedom to be an ability to kill any NPC and see if the world would react. Meanwhile in Skyrim many actions like stealing have repercussions: dudes are hired to beat you, friends can give you gifts, vampires kill your friend and you get inheritance and so on and so on. There are no big branching narratives but I'm sure you can see how those little things may be even more immersive compared to traditional RPG. That traditional RPG will never be able to give you enough freedom or react to all possible outcomes but Skyrim can amaze players by people telling them to stop fucking around when they jump on the table. FFXV clearly took that approach with a lot of reactions to little things and dozens of small self-contained quests with limited choices.
when role-playing in RPGs begins to become too malleable of a concept hark back to the examples used in the first OD&D manuals, where they specifically state that the purpose of role-playing in a table-top RPG is the utilization of the character attributes in relation to the game world, such as a high STR allowing to bash a door or carry a party member, in the most basic sense.
just because you are not talking to someone (i.e. clicking on dialog) does not mean the player is not role-playing within the game. Dialog trees != role-playing. Wizardry is a basic role-playing game, with simple systems (yet very elegant and highly polished) that have stood the test of time, however its comparative "lack" of role-playing does not come from lack of dialog trees but rather from having less ways of conflict resolution (since it is such a focused experience).
Arcanum offers tons of role-playing specifically because the designers allow the use of attributes and skills to accomplish player goals, like for example being able to sweet-talk an NPC into giving you an item, or alternatively waiting for night-fall and going into their house thru a window and stealing it. Both methods offer equal amounts of role-playing however only one of them involves dialog.
just because you are not talking to someone (i.e. clicking on dialog) does not mean the player is not role-playing within the game. Dialog trees != role-playing. Wizardry is a basic role-playing game, with simple systems (yet very elegant and highly polished) that have stood the test of time, however its comparative "lack" of role-playing does not come from lack of dialog trees but rather from having less ways of conflict resolution (since it is such a focused experience).
Arcanum offers tons of role-playing specifically because the designers allow the use of attributes and skills to accomplish player goals, like for example being able to sweet-talk an NPC into giving you an item, or alternatively waiting for night-fall and going into their house thru a window and stealing it. Both methods offer equal amounts of role-playing however only one of them involves dialog.
Falksi
Arcane
Fuck me hasn't this peice of shit died a death yet?
Forget the woeful world, dull as fuck structure, pathetic "hold button to win" combat & shit story. What amazes me is how these lads are supposed to be young & trendy, yet are 10-15 years out of date stylistically.
It's like seeing Toe Jam & Earl 3 released in '98 with them wearing Glam Rock cloths & haircuts. It's a fucking pure embodiment of how utterly out of touch & abysmal this game is.
Forget the woeful world, dull as fuck structure, pathetic "hold button to win" combat & shit story. What amazes me is how these lads are supposed to be young & trendy, yet are 10-15 years out of date stylistically.
It's like seeing Toe Jam & Earl 3 released in '98 with them wearing Glam Rock cloths & haircuts. It's a fucking pure embodiment of how utterly out of touch & abysmal this game is.
I dropped this in favor of Witcher 3. It had been so long since I played a graphically pretty, modern AAA game that when FF15 seduced me with its incredible graphics and presentation, but Witcher 3 offers (almost) as pretty graphics and much better gameplay.
I think FF15, when forgetting about its graphics (which is hard because they are BEAUTIFUL with the HD texture pack), it is objectively the worst FF title ever, much worse than FF13. All you do in Ff15 is run around a gorgous landscape barren of anything worthwhile to do, or anyone interesting (or competently written) to talk with.
If its combat was better it would be a different story, but their decision to not allow real-time inputs for attacking (you have to keep the button held down) was a terrible one. They did it, probably, hoping that not having to "manually" perform consecutive attacks would make the game more palatable to non-action gamers (i.e. their audience), but what it ended up doing was completely breaking the gameplay and not in a good way.
With the simple change of allowing the player to do combos by pressing the attack button instead of having to keep it held down, it would still be a piece of shit but at least it would be marginally more fun to play. Also, allowing the player to give commands to the party (like early Mass Effect, and Kotor) would similarly liven up the combat.
Seriously, it makes Ff13 look like a complete and full game with actual gameplay in comparison.
I think FF15, when forgetting about its graphics (which is hard because they are BEAUTIFUL with the HD texture pack), it is objectively the worst FF title ever, much worse than FF13. All you do in Ff15 is run around a gorgous landscape barren of anything worthwhile to do, or anyone interesting (or competently written) to talk with.
If its combat was better it would be a different story, but their decision to not allow real-time inputs for attacking (you have to keep the button held down) was a terrible one. They did it, probably, hoping that not having to "manually" perform consecutive attacks would make the game more palatable to non-action gamers (i.e. their audience), but what it ended up doing was completely breaking the gameplay and not in a good way.
With the simple change of allowing the player to do combos by pressing the attack button instead of having to keep it held down, it would still be a piece of shit but at least it would be marginally more fun to play. Also, allowing the player to give commands to the party (like early Mass Effect, and Kotor) would similarly liven up the combat.
Seriously, it makes Ff13 look like a complete and full game with actual gameplay in comparison.
ilitarist
Learned
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2016
- Messages
- 857
It's still better written than FFXIII. It's dialogue doesn't consist of saying "enemies of Cocoon" every third line.
I've played it like a somewhat relaxed version of Might & Magic combat. In combat itself you click attack, everything is decided by what you bring to the combat beforehand and items/magic you use during combat. I don't understand what do you mean by having to keep the button held down, I never did that and the game felt responsive and felt like it was meant to be played that way, it also allowed me to get into good position for flanking and backstabbing - if you hold down the button then you also move to attack and thus uncontrollable. The only time when I felt like holding the button where special fights with Leviathan and final boss.
For me combat system had a problem of high survivability; the hardest combat I was in was intense but I couldn't be wiped out because I had a ton of potions and other healing items. This allowed me to grind through the hardest fight in the game I've encountered (one of the imperial bases with 2 giant mechs) by hiding and healing from time to time. Felt cheap, like I didn't deserve that victory. After that I took the boat and combat became trivial.
I've played it like a somewhat relaxed version of Might & Magic combat. In combat itself you click attack, everything is decided by what you bring to the combat beforehand and items/magic you use during combat. I don't understand what do you mean by having to keep the button held down, I never did that and the game felt responsive and felt like it was meant to be played that way, it also allowed me to get into good position for flanking and backstabbing - if you hold down the button then you also move to attack and thus uncontrollable. The only time when I felt like holding the button where special fights with Leviathan and final boss.
For me combat system had a problem of high survivability; the hardest combat I was in was intense but I couldn't be wiped out because I had a ton of potions and other healing items. This allowed me to grind through the hardest fight in the game I've encountered (one of the imperial bases with 2 giant mechs) by hiding and healing from time to time. Felt cheap, like I didn't deserve that victory. After that I took the boat and combat became trivial.
As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.