Author Topic: Tales of Symphonia: Scores. (Read 11349 times)

Kasceis · « **on:** July 06, 2004, 06:53:57 PM »

Gamespot: 8.8
IGN: 8.5

TOS got pretty good scores which is expected from all the good news we've been hearing.

Lets go July 13th!

evil intentions · « **Reply #1 on:** July 06, 2004, 07:49:04 PM »

Almost there...I am a tremendous clownboat. (ahahaha sorry, but I've just always wanted to use that

)

KDR_11k · « **Reply #2 on:** July 06, 2004, 09:24:12 PM »

Hm, what scores are other RPGs given? I have a feeling they're lowering the number on purpose because it's anime as opposed to realism and on the GC instead of the PS2... Or maybe they just upped the numbers for PS2 RPGs...

Syl · « **Reply #3 on:** July 06, 2004, 09:33:34 PM »

just use http://www.gamerankings.com for comparing scores.
or http://www.metacritic.com (less total, better interface also has Music and movies)
http://www.gametab.com also has the same function, but its pride and joy is the fact its a customizable news hub on the front page, and i'm pimping this site because its quite honestly the most useful site i've ever found when it comes to videogame news.

Overall, i've been seeing good scores for Tales, I'm curious what i'll be giving it....

NinGurl69 *huggles · « **Reply #4 on:** July 06, 2004, 09:43:37 PM »

Daisy's frothing demand for this game increases. Good girl.

Mario · « **Reply #5 on:** July 07, 2004, 01:20:38 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
Hm, what scores are other RPGs given? I have a feeling they're lowering the number on purpose because it's anime as opposed to realism and on the GC instead of the PS2... Or maybe they just upped the numbers for PS2 RPGs...

Hit the nail on the head.

8.something = bomb

Bill Aurion · « **Reply #6 on:** July 07, 2004, 03:49:56 AM »

Tales on PS2 would get a 10...

joshnickerson · « **Reply #7 on:** July 07, 2004, 05:49:08 AM »

Is it just me, or has no Gamecube game gotten "Editor's Choice" ever since Mario Kart got such a low score back in November?

couchmonkey · « **Reply #8 on:** July 07, 2004, 06:28:58 AM »

If I may say so, I think 8.5 is a very good score. Of course, the problem is, IGN scores everything pretty high, so yeah, it does seem like they're giving Tales of Symphonia a hard time. It will be interesting to see what scores the PS2 version gets if it comes to the U.S.

Ian Sane · « **Reply #9 on:** July 07, 2004, 07:20:11 AM »

I think it's a frame of reference thing. To us Tales of Symphonia seems like a really big deal because it's pretty much the first major exclusive Cube RPG. If you own a Cube and you like RPGs you're buying this game. So to us this a major game. To a general gamer who also owns a PS2 it's not. Realistically this title would be lost in the shuffle on the PS2. So to us we're more likely to give it a higher score than someone who plays a new RPG every month. It's like how to a Genesis owner Eternal Champions was a big deal because they didn't have Street Fighter II at the time.

I think this shows how smart Namco was in releasing this title for the Cube. As one of only a few Cube RPGs it has received a lot of attention. There's no better way to compete with Final Fantasy and Dragon Warrior than to go to where they aren't.

KDR_11k · « **Reply #10 on:** July 07, 2004, 09:44:25 AM »

Erm, the game sold cubes, so there must be a demand for it even among the non-RPG-starved crowd...

From what I've read so far the game is pretty good even compared to other RPGs, especially since it has a combat system that's actually fun (Oy! Rarity!). I hope it doesn't turn out like Harvest Moon which I eagerly anticipated just to play it 2 hours and shelve it. I'm not sure how valid my oppinions on the game will be to others, I never played any traditional RPG more modern than Skies (there were a few MMORPGs and unconventional RPGs, though).

NinGurl69 *huggles · « **Reply #11 on:** July 07, 2004, 02:57:58 PM »

THE TWO COMMANDMENTS.

1. Don't trust IGN.
2. Refer to #1.

~~~~~

Daisy's frothing demand for this game increases x3.

EXP +10
DEF +5
STR +7
FROTH +52

I love it when she froths like that.

Uncle Rich AiAi · « **Reply #12 on:** July 07, 2004, 04:42:25 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666
THE TWO COMMANDMENTS.

1. Don't trust IGN.
2. Refer to #1.

Indeed. This is IGN that gave FFX-2, a softcore pr0n game, a 9.5.

Syl · « **Reply #13 on:** July 07, 2004, 07:10:48 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
I think it's a frame of reference thing. To us Tales of Symphonia seems like a really big deal because it's pretty much the first major exclusive Cube RPG. If you own a Cube and you like RPGs you're buying this game. So to us this a major game. To a general gamer who also owns a PS2 it's not. Realistically this title would be lost in the shuffle on the PS2. So to us we're more likely to give it a higher score than someone who plays a new RPG every month. It's like how to a Genesis owner Eternal Champions was a big deal because they didn't have Street Fighter II at the time.

I think this shows how smart Namco was in releasing this title for the Cube. As one of only a few Cube RPGs it has received a lot of attention. There's no better way to compete with Final Fantasy and Dragon Warrior than to go to where they aren't.

I actually agree with you for once Ian.

KDR_11k · « **Reply #14 on:** July 08, 2004, 09:31:03 AM »

AiAi: Famitsu gave X-2 40 points, IIRC. Square must be throwing moneyhats left and right. Or the game WAS good.

couchmonkey · « **Reply #15 on:** July 08, 2004, 12:00:08 PM »

I agree with Ian about this RPG being a bigger deal to us than to PS2 fans, but it seems like the game's scores were still a lot better in Japan. Of course, Halo's scores were probably a lot better here than in Japan, so it's all personal taste, isn't it? I read IGN's review and I think the score was pretty well defended. I'm still buying the game though. I need RPGs!

Darc Requiem · « **Reply #16 on:** July 08, 2004, 04:34:57 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
AiAi: Famitsu gave X-2 40 points, IIRC. Square must be throwing moneyhats left and right. Or the game WAS good.

I've played FFX-2. All I have to say is this. A great battle system in a terrible game. Kinda of like Grandia Xtreme. I like the battle system but the rest of the game is dissappointing. FFX-2 isn't really a bad game but its an embarrassment to its precursor. FFX was the first FF game I truly enjoyed since FF6. FFX-2 bastardized FFX just by being its sequel.

Darc Requiem

Urkel · « **Reply #17 on:** July 08, 2004, 10:56:02 PM »

I must say I was hoping for slightly higher scores. At least a 9.0. Especially considering that Japanese gamers voted it the most satisfying game experience of 2003.

I think it's just a bunch of little things that are dragging down the score. Like the mediocre voice acting, the need to level up for bosses, etc...

I guess I was just expecting reviewers to be a little more lenient with these little flaws, considering that the game is actually supposed to be FUN. How often do you hear that descriptor for an RPG? Not often. Even for RPGs that get really high scores (FF8).

But I'm not going to make a big deal out of it. I just hope the game sells well. Then, Namco should port Tales of Eternia to the Cube in the U.S., just to stick it to Sony for not licensing the game for some insane reason.

Infernal Monkey · « **Reply #18 on:** July 09, 2004, 02:14:48 AM »

July 13th? More like July 13th 2005. Oh wai-

"Sorry, not enough bump mapping on the title screen" - IGN

WuTangTurtle · « **Reply #19 on:** July 09, 2004, 02:02:19 PM »

I haven't played FFX2, is it really as bad as u say? What makes it bad? And why do u think it's a softcore pron game?

That fact that u said it though is hilarious!

Don't forget IGN gave Dead or Alive Xtreme Beach Volleyball a 9.2 and yet they gave BG&E a 9.0 wtf?

So according to their review scores, they think DOA is better than BG&E, and DOA is only 0.4 points from being the equal of Wind Waker which got a 9.6.

I don't even want to compare DOA score to ToS score, lol, their xbox channel is so $@%!# up!

Their ratings jump up and down and are just way off. Absolutely horrible review crew.

NinGurl69 *huggles · « **Reply #20 on:** July 09, 2004, 05:29:04 PM »

To top it off, they get paid for what they do.

KDR_11k · « **Reply #21 on:** July 09, 2004, 10:42:51 PM »

Errrrrm, ShaolinKilla, in the upper regions of the scoring field point values increase exponentially. The difference betwen 9.1 and 9.2 is MUCH greater than the difference between 5.0 and 5.1. 9.2 is "great", 9.6 is "closing in on perfection" (may differ depending on the source, but that's usually how it works).

WuTangTurtle · « **Reply #22 on:** July 10, 2004, 12:41:20 AM »

Yeah that's nice and all im just saying how the hell do they justify DOA Volleyball score. My friend has it and he hates playing it, but well u know why he plays it, lol.

I guess if the only thing i could give them a good rating for is the fact that the graphics are very well done and there are a lot of unlockables and stuff, but the gameplay and mechanics and the fact the only real reason to play the game is to unlock skimpy clothing is a cheap aspect of the game.

Seriously as a gamer does anyone here believe DOA volleyball should get a near perfect score?

Uncle Rich AiAi · « **Reply #23 on:** July 10, 2004, 12:43:07 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: ShaolinKilla
I haven't played FFX2, is it really as bad as u say? What makes it bad? And why do u think it's a softcore pron game?

That fact that u said it though is hilarious!

I referred FFX-2 to that b/c Yuna is ugly and Rikku are scantly clad. I'm willing to bet Square used that as it's selling point. Add the fact it's a cash-in sequel, and I bet if Nintendo did a similar thing, everyone would be bad-mouthing them left and right. And what's with a pop singer being a class? O_o

NinGurl69 *huggles · « **Reply #24 on:** July 10, 2004, 01:51:43 AM »

I've seen DOA Volleyboob with the "birthday suit" hack. It doesn't deserve such a high score. It looks better without the hack.

KDR_11k · « **Reply #25 on:** July 10, 2004, 07:59:21 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: AiAi
And what's with a pop singer being a class? O_o

Hey, come on, that's innovation. Instead of fighting the great evil, you ARE the great evil!

Mario · « **Reply #26 on:** July 10, 2004, 04:44:21 PM »

Apparently "Sheena" at the tales.namco.com forums confirmed that Tales of Symphonia won't have any commercials.

bomb

Urkel · « **Reply #27 on:** July 10, 2004, 08:48:09 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario
Apparently "Sheena" at the tales.namco.com forums confirmed that Tales of Symphonia won't have any commercials.

bomb

Jesus. F*cking. Christ.

Why did a B-list platformer like Pac-Man World 2 get commercials, and a major exclusive like ToS doesn't.

If ToS does bomb, I'll send Reggie over to Namco to kick the asses of every single Namco employee and executive. Twice.

KDR_11k · « **Reply #28 on:** July 10, 2004, 10:00:18 PM »

Mario: That true or are you just feeling like spreading pessimistic BS again?

WuTangTurtle · « **Reply #29 on:** July 11, 2004, 08:23:52 AM »

@$!@$%@!@$^%!@#, You think Someone would promote this more, I mean the game has already gained much critics acclaim and much attention with rpg fans. All Namco or Nintendo had to do was at least attempt to inform the less knowing mainstream audience, and this game could really have a chance of selling big time.

I really hope the tales series doesn't get ignored here in the states. I've played the first game in the series and I loved it and apparently namco ported it to GBA in Japan so if it ToS does well here we might get the original.

Syl · « **Reply #30 on:** July 11, 2004, 10:30:42 AM »

I think Namco is relying far too heavily on this title to NOT have any ads for it, of course, I haven't heard of a single one and the game is coming out later this week. =/

Seems that just about everyone else knows about the game though, so all the online pimping and stuff is doing it quite well, even the guys who work at bestbuy sounded interested.

Bill Aurion · « **Reply #31 on:** July 11, 2004, 02:16:57 PM »

Somehow the word is getting around because I've talked to several game shop employees that seemed excited about the release of Tales...

Ymeegod · « **Reply #32 on:** July 11, 2004, 03:01:16 PM »

It's the overall plot that's killing the score and alot of back-tracking to towns. :0.

I'm still grabbing it wednesday (taking a sick day no less

) just for the combat system--sounds great.

Mario · « **Reply #33 on:** July 11, 2004, 05:53:36 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
Mario: That true or are you just feeling like spreading pessimistic BS again?

True, and what do you mean again?

Bill Aurion · « **Reply #34 on:** July 11, 2004, 06:02:41 PM »

You fail for trying to stir up drama in the Tales thread! I hereby sentence you to....give me a massage...I'm sore! =D

majortom1981 · « **Reply #35 on:** July 12, 2004, 02:55:48 AM »

I dont mind backtracking to have to get stuff. In some of the final fantasy series if you forgot something u couldnt go back. Why do I have to wait 2 days to pick this up :*( .

Jonnyboy117 · « **Reply #36 on:** July 12, 2004, 12:20:50 PM »

There really isn't much backtracking, and the plot is very standard RPG stuff...it's only disappointing because this is a series most of us are new to, and we probably expected something newer and more unusual.

GoldShadow1 · « **Reply #37 on:** July 12, 2004, 03:26:31 PM »

Famitsu gave it 36/40 (two 8's, two 9's).

Slightly off-topic: Does this game have random battles?

Bill Aurion · « **Reply #38 on:** July 12, 2004, 03:35:10 PM »

Nope, you will see your enemy on the overworld maps...

It's the way ALL RPGs should be done nowadays... -__-

Syl · « **Reply #39 on:** July 12, 2004, 03:59:03 PM »

I personally PREFER random battles to being able to see enemies, i never understood the distaste for them. @_@

Random Battles make it much easier to train, and just get things done in my mind.

Bill Aurion · « **Reply #40 on:** July 12, 2004, 04:05:01 PM »

But it's not fun to be stuck deep in enemy territory, wishing to get back to a town, and having to battle every two steps... -__-

Mario · « **Reply #41 on:** July 12, 2004, 04:10:13 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: GoldShadow1
Famitsu gave it 36/40 (two 8's, two 9's).

Two 8's and two 9's is 34... I think it got four 9's, or a total of 34.

WuTangTurtle · « **Reply #42 on:** July 12, 2004, 05:24:37 PM »

Yeah random battles can be ok sometimes but some rpgs random battle coding is set awfully bad.

If u played the original Tales of Phantasia game, i think u would know what i mean, u usually had a fight every 5 steps, and that includes the overworld, very annoying when u have very little health.

NinGurl69 *huggles · « **Reply #43 on:** July 12, 2004, 05:27:29 PM »

Yeah, it's bad when there wasn't enough Steak to go around.

KDR_11k · « **Reply #44 on:** July 12, 2004, 09:30:45 PM »

Random encounters force you to imit the number of steps you take to go somewhere, pretty annoying if you want to look around a corner or something and have to fight off two groups of enemies on the way. Either have the enemies run around on the map or add encounter spots instead of an area where you're attacked every 1d10+2 steps or something.

mouse_clicker · « **Reply #45 on:** July 12, 2004, 09:46:52 PM »

I don't mind random battles, but I like visible enemies soooooooo much more.

Of course, in RPG's like the Grandia series I end up attacking every enemy anyway.

Urkel · « **Reply #46 on:** July 12, 2004, 10:12:20 PM »

Random battles are an archaic way of handling enemy encounters. I can tolerate them if the frequency of the battles is low, but honestly, in this day and age it should be done away with. I find that random battles tend to deter exploration. I mean, you might see a treasure chest across the room, but is it really worth 5 minutes of fighting just to get some crappy potion? Usually not.

Also, random battles really piss me off when I get lost. Sometimes, after a long battle, I might forget which way I was headed. Once I realize I'm going in the wrong direction and turn around, I have to fight another battle.

Random battles also just don't make any sense. It's completely illogical why you can keep getting in fights simply by running around in circles in an empty room.

Anyway, I see random battles as being the lazy way out. If they actually had to place enemies in a level, then that would require some actual thought and level design. They would actually have to spend some time deciding where to place enemies, which enemies to put where, etc...

I couldn't believe IGN's review of TOS actually complained about being able to avoid random encounters. "Oh noes! Making the game less tedious is the terribles!"

Ymeegod · « **Reply #47 on:** July 13, 2004, 01:11:10 AM »

Don't think that was the issue. The game forces you to level-up to get by--meaning you really can't sneak passed enemies without having to turn around and face them again anyhow.

I'm 50-50 about random fights. Most games have either a spell or item to reduce the encounter rate and some games let you save in between battles :0.

What's annoying is when they string up BIG boss battles that can take a couple of hours without any save points

.

BTW: Game official arrives today :0.

akdaman1 · « **Reply #48 on:** July 13, 2004, 01:21:23 AM »

Anyone got the game?

Please post impressions.

Dizzy · « **Reply #49 on:** July 13, 2004, 05:57:42 AM »

Holy karma, it's out TODAY! YAY!!!!!! yes I am new here but, that won't stop how much I love Tales of symphonia, lets make a bet, 10 posts say I beat it before all you guys. Hehehehehe. Well anyways it true is a wicked game, I love the storyline too, the music is great, the graphics are great, everything about that game is great, I give it a full 10/10. Well I should go. Laterz.

~Dizzy

Mumei · « **Reply #50 on:** July 13, 2004, 06:03:39 AM »

I need to get it then... I've played through Skies of Arcadia already, and I have everything, so it is rather pointless to replay it for now. Maybe in a few years.

And this is totally of topic, but Dizzy's name makes me think of the Yoshi's Island level named "Touch Fuzzy, Get Dizzy." I loved that level ^_^.

mouse_clicker · « **Reply #51 on:** July 13, 2004, 06:04:22 AM »

Eh, sorry to burst your bubble, but it ships today- it won't be in stores until tomorrow.

I hate how they advertise ship dates, always getting our hopes up.

Bill Aurion · « **Reply #52 on:** July 13, 2004, 06:08:03 AM »

"lets make a bet, 10 posts say I beat it before all you guys."

I'm a 100% whore, so I guess you're probably right... ^_~

Mario · « **Reply #53 on:** July 13, 2004, 06:14:09 AM »

Quote
lets make a bet, 10 posts say I beat it before all you guys.

Let's have a race, see who can drain all the fun out of the game the fastest!

Dizzy · « **Reply #54 on:** July 13, 2004, 06:17:12 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario
Quote
lets make a bet, 10 posts say I beat it before all you guys.

Let's have a race, see who can drain all the fun out of the game the fastest!

hehehe your on mario!

Dizzy · « **Reply #55 on:** July 13, 2004, 06:18:26 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: mouse_clicker
Eh, sorry to burst your bubble, but it ships today- it won't be in stores until tomorrow.

I hate how they advertise ship dates, always getting our hopes up.

Hmmm, everytime I go to a store when it comes out it is always there, oh well we will just have to wait and see.

Bill Aurion · « **Reply #56 on:** July 13, 2004, 06:23:36 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Dizzy
Quote
Originally posted by: Mario
Quote
lets make a bet, 10 posts say I beat it before all you guys.

Let's have a race, see who can drain all the fun out of the game the fastest!

hehehe your on mario!

That was a joke...I hope you didn't take that seriously... <_<

Dizzy · « **Reply #57 on:** July 13, 2004, 06:29:40 AM »

drat, oh well I'll still beat the game before all of you, my main record for rpg games is 5 days, my record for any other game is 3. I think I'm off topic now...oh well

Dizzy · « **Reply #58 on:** July 13, 2004, 07:21:27 AM »

well it looks like you were right, oh well until then.

KDR_11k · « **Reply #59 on:** July 13, 2004, 08:01:48 AM »

Having to clean outdungeons is better than random encounters, after all you can at least clean out the dungeon. Also, dungeons seem more alive with monsters running around instead of empty halls with random encounters coming out of nowhere...

Syl · « **Reply #60 on:** July 13, 2004, 08:29:01 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Urkel
Random battles are an archaic way of handling enemy encounters. I can tolerate them if the frequency of the battles is low, but honestly, in this day and age it should be done away with. I find that random battles tend to deter exploration. I mean, you might see a treasure chest across the room, but is it really worth 5 minutes of fighting just to get some crappy potion? Usually not.

Also, random battles really piss me off when I get lost. Sometimes, after a long battle, I might forget which way I was headed. Once I realize I'm going in the wrong direction and turn around, I have to fight another battle.

Random battles also just don't make any sense. It's completely illogical why you can keep getting in fights simply by running around in circles in an empty room.

Anyway, I see random battles as being the lazy way out. If they actually had to place enemies in a level, then that would require some actual thought and level design. They would actually have to spend some time deciding where to place enemies, which enemies to put where, etc...

I couldn't believe IGN's review of TOS actually complained about being able to avoid random encounters. "Oh noes! Making the game less tedious is the terribles!"

Thats actually why I love random battles, if i want to get an item, then I have to work for it. I absolutely HATE having to run into enemies for them to fight me, makes training take FAR too long, espicially in games where you have to leave the map and come back for more enemies.

Sure, random battles are annoying at times, but theyre supposed to be, Its not like you *have* to fight them, every game i know of with random battles has a "repellent" of some sorts.

*shrugs* suppose i'm just lazy

Ian Sane · « **Reply #61 on:** July 13, 2004, 08:56:57 AM »

"Sure, random battles are annoying at times, but theyre supposed to be"

A good game is never "annoying". They can be difficult or challenging but you should never be irritated by a game. If you can see the damn enemies you get a choice: fight everything in sight or don't. With random battles you don't get that option. So I suppose if you always want to fight everything in sight you like random battles but it's pretty selfish to want developers to cater just to you and not give the rest of us the option.

Ideally though if I made an RPG you would be able to see all the enemies but I would include the option to make the battles random just to satisfy everyone and make insane purists shut up. How odd that by including a non-user friendly mode I would be making a more user-friendly game.

Mumei · « **Reply #62 on:** July 13, 2004, 09:06:38 AM »

Have you played any of the Mega Man games? Or Ikaruga? Or Viewtiful Joe? Those games can all be frustrating, regardless of how incredible they are. Or are you only referring to RPGs and the "random battles" aspect of it. And they are annoying. If I want to get into a battle to gain experience, I can run around for 5 minutes without getting into a battle. If I don't want a battle, I can hardly go three steps without getting into a battle. I have absolutely terrible luck >_<.

Bill Aurion · « **Reply #63 on:** July 13, 2004, 09:13:39 AM »

What you are facing in the games you mentioned is challenge and a necessity...Random battles, on the otherhand, are pointless and are needlessly added to add gametime...

And don't get me started on the horrendous luck I have in games, because I would rather not get into it... ;__;

Ian Sane · « **Reply #64 on:** July 13, 2004, 10:26:59 AM »

"Have you played any of the Mega Man games? Or Ikaruga? Or Viewtiful Joe? Those games can all be frustrating, regardless of how incredible they are."

I never find playing those games irritating though even if they are hard. It's mostly because I have a lot more control I guess. It's not random luck that determines how hard something is. I know I have to dodge this or jump this. I don't have random occurances that determine the difficulty. If I die it's because I screwed up not because I got attacked by too many invisible enemies before I reached the save point. In Ikuraga I get farther in the game every time I play. In RPGs with random battles most of the time I get stuck in a situation where I don't have enough health to get back to the inn without getting killed by random enemies. If I'm stuck in that situation no amount of skill can save me. That situation should NEVER happen in any game.

Mumei · « **Reply #65 on:** July 13, 2004, 10:32:28 AM »

I know it is because I screwed up

. I just get frustrated at myself for being stupid and the games can then become infuriating... Yet I come back for more

.

Syl · « **Reply #66 on:** July 13, 2004, 10:51:38 AM »

Quote
n RPGs with random battles most of the time I get stuck in a situation where I don't have enough health to get back to the inn without getting killed by random enemies. If I'm stuck in that situation no amount of skill can save me. That situation should NEVER happen in any game.

Oddly enough, that has *NEVER* happened to me in any RPG i've played. You are aware that you *CAN* run from random battles, right? Or perhaps buy healing items beforehand? Maybe think ahead because its generally obvious WHEN your going to get into a random battle, and if you aren't strong enough for the area.. then TRAIN.

I don't think i have ever lost to random battles in an RPG unless I was playing incredibly poorly, and i know for a fact that wasn't because "the battles were random" it was because of poor planning and basicly being stupid.

Mumei · « **Reply #67 on:** July 13, 2004, 10:54:06 AM »

It has happened to me once... I was playing LLG in FFIX and it is almost impossible to run away in that game without using flee >_<. I didn't have Zidane with me... It took forever to get to my destination; walk 2 steps, save, walk 2 steps, save, repeat >_<.

Ian Sane · « **Reply #68 on:** July 13, 2004, 11:06:33 AM »

"You are aware that you *CAN* run from random battles, right?"

No you can't. Any game I've been stuck in has a like 0.01% chance of a successful run. And if you run away you just get killed by the first battle you encounter that it won't let you run away from. I'm talking about situations where you've ran out of healing items and magic. I should be able to get out of that using my own skill. I CAN'T in an RPG with random battles which is why random battles suck. I shouldn't have to restart a 50+ hour game because I made a mistake and forgot to check how many healing items I have. If it's possible for that to happen the game is worthless sh!t.

Anyone who supports random battles has no arguement. You are all just stuck in this little formula that you like that you don't want RPGs to move out of. The best arguement for random battles I've ever heard is "I like it and don't want it to change so there."

RPG is the only genre where fans support archaeic design. You never hear platformer fans talking about how much they miss blind leaps of faith or FPS fans talking about how they miss the days where you couldn't aim up or down.

WesDawg · « **Reply #69 on:** July 13, 2004, 11:10:02 AM »

Quote
In RPGs with random battles most of the time I get stuck in a situation where I don't have enough health to get back to the inn without getting killed by random enemies. If I'm stuck in that situation no amount of skill can save me. That situation should NEVER happen in any game.

LOL. This is apparently because you suck at RPG's.

Half the difficulty in RPGs was that you didn't have total control, so you had to be prepared for random occurances. It made them challenging. Sure you might be able to make it to a particular chest in a dungeon, but you also had to have the stregth to get out then too. It required you to spend a lot of time building up your team, and hence, you got attached to them without the need for these crappy love stories and horrible dramas that seem to plague RPG's anymore.

Bill Aurion · « **Reply #70 on:** July 13, 2004, 12:25:19 PM »

"Half the difficulty in RPGs was that you didn't have total control"

And because you aren't in total control I feel that the point in the adventure is pretty moot...You should be able to choose not only where you go, but what and how often you fight...

Jale · « **Reply #71 on:** July 13, 2004, 12:34:31 PM »

Which is why Tales of Symphonia and games like Morrowind are good: because you can see and avoid enemies but fi you aren't good enough they will ge you anyway.

mouse_clicker · « **Reply #72 on:** July 13, 2004, 12:38:39 PM »

Quote
RPG is the only genre where fans support archaeic design. You never hear platformer fans talking about how much they miss blind leaps of faith or FPS fans talking about how they miss the days where you couldn't aim up or down.

I dunno, being able to aim up and down made the games more complex- I preferred just going around shooting in Doom I/II and Wolfenstein 3D.

Still the best FPS's ever.

Ian Sane · « **Reply #73 on:** July 13, 2004, 12:40:33 PM »

"I dunno, being able to aim up and down made the games more complex- I preferred just going around shooting in Doom I/II and Wolfenstein 3D."

Quiet.

Syl · « **Reply #74 on:** July 13, 2004, 02:29:21 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill
"Half the difficulty in RPGs was that you didn't have total control"

And because you aren't in total control I feel that the point in the adventure is pretty moot...You should be able to choose not only where you go, but what and how often you fight...

Choosing when and how often you fight ruins the RPG experience for me.

But, i suppose views can differ, I just prefer plain ol' random battles to anything else. Simple, Easy, not nearly as aggrivating in the long run. I actually find it faster as well, as I can worry about WHERE I need to get to, instead of where i can go so i can get into another fight. I hate having to go out of my way to fight an enemy, I prefer just getting through a dungeon, random battling and getting all the chests, then right before the end sitting and training till i see no reason too anymore. Then i take on the boss and move on.

Urkel · « **Reply #75 on:** July 13, 2004, 09:27:32 PM »

I've yet to play an RPG that didn't use random battles that I didn't like. Yeah, double negative. Sue me. Anyway, I think that's because RPG makers that let you see enemies beforehand are actually concerned about not using outdated game mechanics, and therefore tend to make a better game overall.

I believe Nintendo understands this. Nintendo knows how to make t3h funs. Just look at the RPGs they've worked on:

Super Mario RPG. Square made this one, but I'll bet a hojillion dollars it was Nintendo's hand in the development that kept this game random battle free. The game was beloved by many.

Earthbound. No random battles. Beloved by many. And by many, I mean the scary obsessive fans that inhabit Starmen.net that somehow STILL find a way to update a website every day for a game that came out a decade ago.

Paper Mario. No random battles. Beloved by many.

Mario & Luigi. See above.

I think I made my point. Nintendo knows that random battles != fun. Nintendo puts the game into Role Playing Game.

I honestly believe that random battles would be virtually extinct if the Final Fantasy games didn't use them anymore. It's an uber-popular series with a lot of influence. I think most other developers see its success, and say "Hey, Final Fantasy uses random battles, and that series is considered to be top-tier. Millions of people love it. What's good enough for Final Fantasy is good enough for us."

All I know is, when I play an RPG with a lot of random battles, I start thinking to myself "I swear, if I get into ONE more battle before I reach the exit, there's going to be a murder-suicide on the news REAL soon."

Mario · « **Reply #76 on:** July 13, 2004, 09:40:10 PM »

Pokemon.

Bill Aurion · « **Reply #77 on:** July 13, 2004, 09:41:26 PM »

Well Pokemon only has random encounters you can't avoid in cave areas...Hopefully they'll work it out so you won't have to in future games...

Caillan · « **Reply #78 on:** July 13, 2004, 09:45:14 PM »

Remember you can avoid random battles in most of the Pokeworld (except for that accursed Mt. Moon). Just use 'cut' on the grass and the Pokemon will bother you no longer.

Urkel · « **Reply #79 on:** July 13, 2004, 10:15:16 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario
Pokemon.

It's amazing how you can make me feel like an idiot with just one word.

Yeah, I forgot about Pokemon.

There's a slight amount of justification for random battles in Pokemon. Since that game is about catching rare creatures and such, a bit of randomness is acceptable. Still, they need to update that game and figure out a way to have you catching rare Pokemon without random battles.

DrZoidberg · « **Reply #80 on:** July 13, 2004, 11:38:44 PM »

this topic has been cleaned, carry on.

Dizzy · « **Reply #81 on:** July 14, 2004, 06:40:58 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
Having to clean outdungeons is better than random encounters, after all you can at least clean out the dungeon. Also, dungeons seem more alive with monsters running around instead of empty halls with random encounters coming out of nowhere...

This is what I call gaming advanced, they will keep making more games like this until they find a better way to present the monster in RPG games.

Syl · « **Reply #82 on:** July 14, 2004, 06:43:01 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Urkel
Quote
Originally posted by: Mario
Pokemon.

It's amazing how you can make me feel like an idiot with just one word.

Yeah, I forgot about Pokemon.

There's a slight amount of justification for random battles in Pokemon. Since that game is about catching rare creatures and such, a bit of randomness is acceptable. Still, they need to update that game and figure out a way to have you catching rare Pokemon without random battles.

That would completely and 100%ly ruin the game to me, it wouldn't make the monsters "rare" anymore. Just doesn't work.

I honestly don't see whats so bad about random battles, you keep mentioning issuse that i just don't think exist.

I have to admit that Paper Mario and Mario and Luigi did battles very well, because what you do to an enemy outside of the battle screen effects what happens to it at the start of battle. Earthbound, however, did *NOT* do it well, earthbound is one of the few instances where i wish the game had random battles, as trying to go so far after an enemy is really a pain.

I'm not saying that every game without random battles is bad, far from it. I just prefer random battles... I don't see any issue with them, they just make the game far more enjoyable to me. I know theres no way in hell i would have been able to train nearly as much as i have in certain games if the battles weren't random. Espicially the golden suns, for instance.

Bill Aurion · « **Reply #83 on:** July 14, 2004, 06:50:15 AM »

"That would completely and 100%ly ruin the game to me, it wouldn't make the monsters "rare" anymore. Just doesn't work."

Yeah it could...You'd just see the "rarer" Pokemon a lot less often...Of course, accomplishing this feat in 2d is a lot harder than it would be in 3d...

Mumei · « **Reply #84 on:** July 14, 2004, 06:54:04 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill
"That would completely and 100%ly ruin the game to me, it wouldn't make the monsters "rare" anymore. Just doesn't work."

Yeah it could...You'd just see the "rarer" Pokemon a lot less often...Of course, accomplishing this feat in 2d is a lot harder than it would be in 3d...

I would hate that... You could just enter and exit the room repeatedly until you saw the ones that you wanted. And then you could save your game and repeatedly catch them until you got the exact stats that you wanted. It would take away the effort of catching a bunch of the same one in hopes of getting the exact one you want... It would make it too easy

.

Bill Aurion · « **Reply #85 on:** July 14, 2004, 06:56:03 AM »

I'm sure you could make it so you couldn't do that, but *I'm* not the programmer...

As I said, it would be a lot easier to implement in a 3d version of the game...

Mumei · « **Reply #86 on:** July 14, 2004, 07:00:56 AM »

I didn't say anything about the implementation.... It would have that same problem regardless of whether it was a 2D or 3D game....

Bill Aurion · « **Reply #87 on:** July 14, 2004, 07:03:53 AM »

Uh, not in the 3d Pokemon game I picture...Since the overworld would be Zelda-esque, pokemon would be constantly coming and going from the area...Rarer pokemon could be made to appear only after a predetermined amount of time or after fighting a number of common pokemon...Just because you can't think of a way it could work doesn't mean that it never can and never will...

Mumei · « **Reply #88 on:** July 14, 2004, 07:05:33 AM »

It just works better as a game with optional random battles. If you don't want the battles, stay out of the grass. It would be so easy to only fight the ones that you wanted to fight; it would take the challenge out of getting a good one.

KDR_11k · « **Reply #89 on:** July 14, 2004, 07:11:09 PM »

Syl: Random encounters are absolutely uncontrollable, too frequent and even if you flee often involve at least ten seconds intro and outro anims. Another problem are zoomed battles. Or, more exactly, zoomed+random is the problem. You walk a random number of steps (in a good game there should be no random factor!), the screen fades over, you fight or flee or whatever, the screen zooms out, repeat. The problem is that designers tend to be lazy. If a game has random levels, they'll just say "Oh, just tack on 2 hours worth of dungeons here" or if it has random encounters "Oh, make this 50m cavern take 30 minutes, will you?". Hell, the first mission in Final Fantasy 8 involves running 70m through a seemingly empty cavern and fighting the boss. This happens with an adjustable time limit and can take 20 minutes (half of which go to the boss, but still... 10 minutes for three screens).

Syl · « **Reply #90 on:** July 14, 2004, 09:15:19 PM »

Quote
(in a good game there should be no random factor!)

You obviously don't play *NEAR* enough online games if you think that, if diablo II wasn't 99% randomised, theres no way in hell i would have devoted the 2.5 years i did to the title.

Same thing with most RPGs, if the battles weren't randomised then i would have never been able to bother to get my characters up to a higher level/go for that rare item (Golden sun). Tis part of the reason i was so undertrained in most RPG's that *aren't* random, because it forces you to go through the same area again, fighting the same enemies, AGAIN, in the exact same spots, its just far far less interesting and quickly becomes duller. Leveling up in chrono trigger is a complete bitch because the only place thats logical is the black omen, and you have to go through the entire damn thing once you start.
Earthbound, luckily, is slightly more random with enemy placement, but I hated having to track down the enemies worth fighting.

Randomizing makes games have *much*more enjoyable and not nearly as monotomous replay for me, espicially games that end up requiring gameplay that will be repeated (RPG's, for instance)

Randomnes, though it might have something to do with lazyness, is also carefully balanced in itself. Its also very useful.

KDR_11k · « **Reply #91 on:** July 15, 2004, 05:20:39 AM »

Okay, okay, should have phrased that differently. I meant no randomness in critical game elements. But then the goal of an RPG is NOT to give you control over your character but to make the character's actions depend on the character instead of the player... IMO that's bad game design, but I guess nobody cares.

So far I haven't had a single game with visible enemies where killing everything wasn't enough to get out of the dungeon appropriately leveled. Diablo 2 is a good example: It's possible to clean out a dungeon and cleaning out every dungeon once gives you enough experience to proceed, no need to repeat a dungeon except for powerlevelling or items.

Syl · « **Reply #92 on:** July 17, 2004, 07:53:05 AM »

http://www.gamerdad.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=901&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0
^Strangely on topic with what this thread has turned into.

News:

Author Topic: Tales of Symphonia: Scores. (Read 11349 times)