FF III is a dungeon crawler at heart. Do not come expecting the epic stories of later games in the series. I can already hear the cheers from those who have chastised the series for being overwrought with drama and who welcome the return to a simpler time, but not so fast. Matrix Software did not leave the story alone; they added personality to the formerly faceless and nameless characters and expanded on a few story sequences as well. This compromise between story and action, between character development and gameplay, is actually worse than either extreme. What has been developed is a game that has a minimal story and almost zero character development but has pretensions of being a grand adventure story. The dialogue is terrible, filled with Japanese clichés and overdramatic word choice (this may yet be changed in localization). The story itself is predictable, and when it does take a dramatic turn, the ham-fisted dialogue robs the scenes of any dramatic flavor.
The game does try to spice things up with humor occasionally, but these attempts fall flat or seem incredibly out of place. For example, if you activate a piano in a certain inn, the patrons of that inn will dance rather crudely to "Grease Lightning". Most other attempts at humor revolve around the "old man" stock character familiar to Japanese audiences.
If you do not have a solid grasp on the Japanese language, it's better to just wait for the localized release in November. In order to understand the basics of the game, like where you need to go and how to get there, you will need to be able to read Japanese on a level most students don't obtain until at least their third year studying the language at a university level. Understanding the story (as simple as it is) would take an even higher level of proficiency. However, if you are a fluent reader, you can import the game from our partners at Lik-Sang.
The game is hard, and difficulty is something that tends to be rather rare in games these days. In the past sixteen years, developers have realized that being creamed by enemies within minutes of the first encounter is not fun. In this respect, Final Fantasy III is definitely old school. Most of the enemies you encounter will not be that difficult. There are a few annoying enemies that will replicate themselves if you cannot kill them in one hit, but this is more of an annoyance than a problem. The normal enemies are deceptively easy; the bosses are where the real problem lies. You can waltz through a dungeon, barely taking a hit, and then be slaughtered in two turns by the boss. The bosses in Final Fantasy III have moves that will kill most party members in two hits, or just one if it is a critical hit. This issue, combined with the fact that bosses have between two and four actions per turn, means that your characters will drop fast. Victory in combat is determined by the luck of the draw; if the enemy decides to take out your White Mage, and you do not have any precious and rare Phoenix Down items, there is not much you can do other than take the punishment the boss gives you and try again.
The turn system only aggravates the issue. You issue orders to all four of your characters at the same time. The character's speed stat is then used to determine who goes first. This means that whether or not you can heal your party (healing is effectively required every turn in boss battles) before a boss gets his lethal strike off is just a matter of luck. Should a character die and you have to resurrect him, the battle turns into a game of whack-a-mole, with you reviving one character just as another is taken out. In most RPGs, you can level up if a boss is giving you trouble, and while this is a possibility in FF III, it doesn't do a whole lot of good. How much damage you deal and take is determined more by equipment than by level. There are many places in the game where the next best armor and weapons are available only after you take out a boss. This asinine system results in you having to fight boss battles repeatedly until you get lucky and actually win. As victory in battle is a result of being lucky rather than work or skill, it saps away a good chunk of the rewarding feelings you would normally have from beating the boss.
Final Fantasy III introduced the “Job System" to the series. Since then variations on what FF III developed have appeared in no less than five Final Fantasy games since. The system in Final Fantasy III can be obtuse and counter-intuitive. It takes third fiddle to equipment and level in terms of taking and dealing damage. There was a large chunk of the game where my white mage was dealing as much damage as my character I was guiding through the fighting classes because I found a good staff for her, but I could not find a good blade for my Knight. Even worse was when my geomancer and my archer were outperforming him, in physical damage. The job effects how fast certain stats level up, but equipment and level are so much more important.
The art style resembles that of Final Fantasy IX, which is not surprising as that game was a tribute to the older Final Fantasy games. The character models, while simple, remain faithful to the style of the original. What's more, the towns and dungeons are fully rendered, unlike the pre-rendered backgrounds of Final Fantasy VII, VIII, and IX. These dungeons are actually the most impressive graphical feat of the game, which is good because you will be looking at them a lot.
The game is controllable either through traditional a D-pad/button combo or the touch screen. Touch screen controls work pretty much as you would expect: you tap a command, then tap the character you want to attack or heal. The touch screen controls do not add much to the game though, and the D-pad is far simpler and more intuitive.
The soundtrack is exactly what you would expect from Final Fantasy. Nobuo Uematsu's soundtrack hits all the right notes, and the new versions of these old tunes are perfect. There is even one track where the original 8-bit sound has been kept, and it is without a doubt the best track in the game. However, no new songs were composed for this remake. This results in a handful of excellent tracks being reused for a great number of scenarios. There is the town track, the castle track, the dungeon track, and the melodramatic story turn track, and over the course of the thirty or so hour quest, there are very few surprises. The sound is great but the lack of variety hurts it.
It is only the production values: graphics, music, and pedigree that make this game stand out. At its heart, Final Fantasy III is a dated and mediocre RPG that will only please the most die-hard Final Fantasy fans. With all its problems and the North American release only two months away, with hope that the localization will be an improvement, there is little reason to import Final Fantasy III.
Pros:
Lastability: 8.0
The quest is notably shorter than modern Final Fantasy games, but you'll die so often that while the clock may read twenty five or thirty hours, your actual play time will probably be closer to forty or fifty, which is not bad for a handheld game.
Final: 6.5
Great graphics and sound cannot make up for poor writing and frustrating gameplay.
Quote
You randomly go into these repetitive battles that neither tests your skills/reflex nor does it test your mental abilities.
Quote
Originally posted by: ThePerm
renting ds games..must be nice. my local blockbuster has a ton of psp games to rent and no ds games. It makes me laugh because none are checked out and at the same time ds is totally whooping the PSPs ass in sales.
Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing
"Subjectivity" isn't sometime that qualifies/disqualifies someone, but it's something to keep in mind. A review can never be completely objective, nor should it strive to be. It's impossible, because it's a subjective piece by nature. If a "review" turns out to be completely objective, then it is merely a discription of the final version of a game. That's fine and dandy, and often a lot more helpful to a reader than someone just going "This game sucks," but in my mind it's not really a review. It's a post-preview. Or something. I don't know.
I feel a review should be a mix between a preview and impressions (of the final version of a game, of course), if that makes sense. There should be factual description as well as subjective commentary. A review with all facts sucks, and a review with all opinion sucks. Both = yay.
Quote
Originally posted by: nemyhlovecraft
So, you would have given the game a lower score because you've played it, or what? Eh, whatever, I won't give you a hard time for being stupid because thats not something you can really change. As for the review, I found it pretty shallow. You didn't like a classic JRPG because it featured the concepts inherent to a JRPG. Is that what I should be taking away from this? I would have liked to know how polished the engine is, how well MogNet worked, how well the Job system works. Maybe even how many hours of gameplay there actually was, of course you'd probably have to get past hour 5 to give a good reading on that. I can understand the desire to be known as "that guy" who thought it was cool to give an FF game a low review because their indie music sensabilities just have to leak over into every other aspect of their life, but I just have to think how bad it will look for PGC when every other media outlet is giving fairly decent scores and their reviewers have insightful things to say about game mechanics and the future of dense RPGs on the DS.
Quote
On another note, I was planning for this to be the first FF game I've played
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
This review didn't sound like he hates the genre, it sounds like FF3 sucks. Unbalanced difficulty, randomness being more important than skill, a plot that's shallower than a puddle, typically NES. These aren't common traits of the genre, they are common traits of old games with very unripe gameplay. Even if it was standard for the genre he should have deducted points for it because bad game design is inexcusable, no matter how many other games in the genre do it wrong as well. If an MMO has a lot of grind, deduct points. If a sports game has almost no changes compared to the slightly oder game that goes for a tenner now, deduct points. If an FPS is like every other goddamn FPS deduct points. If you can't make a good game within genre conventions you must break the conventions.
If you want dungeon crawling with random, infuriating deaths then play Nethack.
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
/faints at the neglect of FFVI
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
see, but i see nothing wrong with that, I find newer FF games just waaay too easy!
He never said the game was actually difficult, he said most of the game was a cakewalk and the bosses were horribly overpowered compared to the rest. Unbalanced difficulty, not high difficulty.
Unripe? no, it's classic throwback style, it's the style people grew up with playing J-RPG's.
Throwback or not it doesn't stack up to modern games.
Final Fantasy the very 1st one, remember how hard that was? man it was a challenge, nowaday's alot of Final Fantasy games are a breeze, just look at FFX too easy, good gameplay though but just too easy.
FFX is damn hard. I mean, it'd take years to get the patience to stand that game's battle system for more than an hour. Never mind the constant desire to rip Yuna's head off, stick it on a pole and parade it through town.
It just seems like the reviewer is nitpicking... Not enough music?
Well cause the original DIDN'T have many soundtracks, all they did was just probably revamp everything with good graphics better lvling up system and better everything, except keeping the game true to the people who truly love the old school JRPG gaming.
This is a remake, they had the chance to fix what was broken with the original and they failed to do so.
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
Failed to do what? Square was about to go bankrupt until Final Fantasy came along!
Failed to improve upon the NES game they released back then. I don't think Square-Enix was about to go bankrupt until FF3DS came out.
Horribly Overpowered? wtf? no, they weren't, you just needed to battle alot more, i beat Final Fantasy pretty easily.
Overpowered in relation to the dungeon they're in. The review clearly says that powerlevelling would be very slow since it's very equipment based. Requiring the player to grind for hours in every dungeon jut to be able to beat the boss is horrible game design and inexcusable, especially if the normal enemies don't pose a challenge anyway.
And if anybody calls FFX Hard thats just sad, because any final fantasy gamer would tell you, you are dead wrong, and people who actually grew up playing Dragon Quest and Final Fantasy.
You may have missed the sarcasm (was that really sarcasm or was it some other form of speech?) I used to convey that the game is just so horribly boring and repetitive that it's hard to find the willpower to continue.
and suprisingly this is the only review i have ever seen that doesn't average the score. which doesn't make sense at all...
WTF, why would they average the score? If the game's no fun to play perfect scores for graphics shouldn't pull up the score, neither should bad graphics or sound diminish the scores of awesome games. No game's overall value is just the unweighted average of its components.
And i for one don't beleive a person that calls FFIII a rediculous hard gameplay as one of it's con's. and a person who says that through alot of my j-RPG experience probably hasn't played many J-RPG's.
That's why there's a review text explaining that only the bosses are difficult, not the regular enemies.
Not only that, the Job System i heard can make things difficult which probably the reviewer couldn't grasp the right combinations to master.
Forcing people to min/max is bad balancing.
this already tells me that he doesn't know how to play the game well, this is telling me that he doesn't know how to play the game very well. This also applies to games like Final Fantasy VI which is quite hard, at some times, but alot of times it isn't Victory, the reveiwer might think it is Lucky but it's all skills, for the problem also not only in equipment but also Leveling, nowhere have i ever read that You need a Certain Weapon to beat the game unless it's part of the story in any J-RPG game. Saying when your charachter dies and Right after you revive him, your other charachter dies, this thing basically happens in EVERY SINGLE J-RPG OUT THERE!
How is that not being able to play the game right? Having bosses capable of killing one of your characters in one turn (not one attack but the interval between player interactions) is very frustrating and should reduce the score.
Nor does the reviewer even mention the "Multi Hits" warrior class gets in later lvl's that outdamage other charachters in Melee Damage nor does he mention the Dual Wielding or Any other abilities, he just mentions Oh the game is hard because my Warrior Dishes out the same amount of damage and Heavily requires on Equipment? I also think he forgot to mention the Skills, which also can help dish out more damage then regular physcial attacks...
Also he doesn't even mention that The more YOU LVL UP THE MORE AMOUNT OF TIMES YOU CAN USE A CERTAIN SKILL!
Using Skills is a Huge Deal!
Not only that You have to EQUIP Magic! and you can only equip up to a certain amount, so for a Black Mage you would have to Equip the Right Type to Defeat the Boss easier, and try to find which magic it's the weakest too!
it just seems like All he did was test out Physical Damage of All classes!
Or maybe he was writing a review instead of a manual and as such decided against going into such minutiae?
Seriously J-RPG's alot of times do Require Equipment alot of times to dish out more damage... so I don't see the complaint, and yes alot of J-RPG's are linear like this one and you can't get Certain Items unless you Beat a certain Boss.
That wasn't his point.
Usually if you can't beat the boss you just need to lvl up more, i doubt the reviewer even tried seeing how as Tons of other people could beat it and it's NOT OUT OF LUCK! J-RPG games are never about luck! they were about Skill and planning out what to do before hand Before going into battle. and you get to Think ahead of Time what to do.
How's it skill to repeatedly kill weak monsters just so your level increases?
I've never read any reviewer who said Turn Based Battles are based on luck because you can't heal fast enough just sounds like he has NEVER played a J-RPG in his life!
Maybe because he didn't say that ALL games are like that, just this one?
And in conclusion:
Doesn't stack up to modern games? yes it does, it stacks up to people who like throwbacks and classic J-RPG games, IF YOU DON'T LIKE CLASSIC J-RPG's you aren't going to like this game.
Well yes but this review is for people who like modern games or modern RPGs, not the few people who like "classic" jRPGs. If you enjoy syour gams like that, feel free to buy it but the rest of the world deserves a fair warning that this game isn'T suitable for anyone outside of a small core demographic.
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
BTW i was talking about Final Fantasy and how that game helped Squaresoft... notice i didn't put the III in front of the Final Fantasy.
Yes but this thread is about FF3 and FF3 only. He didn't rate FF1-6, he rated FF3.
Failed to Improve what?
Gameplay. Music variety. Pretty much everything that's wrong about this remake.
And seriously i don't know what he found wrong with the story, since i read it and alot of other people liked it too.
He said it's too much like the 08/15 standard RPG story and that the added dialogue just hurts the story because it's so bad.
I think alot of J-RPG players are going to like this game! too bad you don't! you don't even seem to like FFX sadly...
Yeah I'm sorry I enjoy games that are fun to play and don't have areas consisting of one long path with random encounters every five steps that take about an hour to get through even if you run from every encounter combined with a combat system where every enemy has a VERY simple tactic to be defeated easily and battle is just matching each enemy to the character in your party that beats him. That's just boring to play.
Anyways obviously you even haven't played it, i haven't played it but the fact is that this review is not a good review and it just seems like the person who wrote it is bored of J-RPG's or just doesn't like Dungeon Crawlers in General.
"You haven't played it! Well, I haven't played it either but YOU'RE WRONG!"
I like dungeon crawlers provided they don't get repetitive. Unfortunately most of them fail that condition.
Forcing people to Minimum/Max Balancing is bad Gameplay?
LOL! then every single Japanese RPG out there must be Horrible!
There's a difference between allowing it and making it necessary for progrssing.
and Obviously if he can't kill the Boss he himself needs to lvl up, because obviously this is the first reviewer i have known to even COMPLAIN about Bosses killing them in one hit. Because i guess those reviewers are smarter and know how to play Harder Japanese RPG games out there and understand that you need to be a higher lvl!
He said he tried just that but didn't have much success. And he didn't say bosses kill him in one hit but if there's an unlucky combination of attacks (since the boss can strike multiple times) he can lose a critical member of his party between two player interactions. I'd guess that's the fault of the battle system forcing you to give out all orders beforehand so you can't change targets for a healing spell/item if another character is hit before your healer's turn.
And Since the other numbers don't count then why did gameplay get a 5.0 while the final score gets 6.5? The Numbers do not make sense.
Because he found the overall package to be slightly more enjoyable?
Going Against what Manual? YOU NEED TO USE SKILLS IN ORDER TO DEFEAT BOSSES! The reviewer doesn't even talk about USING Skills OR WHAT TYPE OF PARTY HE MADE!
For all We know he USED a crappy party! he doesn't even talk about a Black Mage which is ONE OF THE MOST DAMAGING CLASSES OUT OF EVERY SINGLE FINAL FANTASY CLASS!
Yes but why does he need to write about that in the review? It's a review, not a manual or strategy guide.
"How's it skill to repeatedly kill weak monsters just so your level increases?"
You can say this for about every single Japanese RPG out there.
how's it skill? it isn't if you keep on killing weak monsters, your level isn't going to increase faster, therefore you find harder monsters to kill.
He said this:
Most of the enemies you encounter will not be that difficult. There are a few annoying enemies that will replicate themselves if you cannot kill them in one hit, but this is more of an annoyance than a problem. The normal enemies are deceptively easy; the bosses are where the real problem lies.
Now where do you take those stronger monsters from?
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
No it's not the fault of the Battle System, the Battle System is the perfect Battle System they used Before FFVII which is the same they used for FF-1-IV,
Did it occur to you that many people may not consider that "perfect"?
If he dies often, he should lvl up more as i say, and get a certain lvl so he can get powerfull enough to beat a boss with certain Skills he can acquire in lvling up.
Or he can deduct points because the regular enemies don't leave any clue how powerful you need to be to take on the boss or if you do enough to beat each boss easily the regular enemies pose no challenge. Both are reasons to lower the score.
I'm saying you yourself can find Harder Monsters to LVL up to Fight The Boss Monsters!
How? The monsters are much weaker than the boss, remember? That was the whole complaint about the gameplay.
He need to write it in his review so we know how he himself played the game, For all we know he is basing his own facts about the game by using Physical Damage, and we don't know if the person even used the right certain kinds of skills to defeat the bosses.
I disagree, noone wants to know that.
Because he Found the Overall Package more enjoyable? how is that possible when The "most" important one is gameplay?
You may notice that the score is only minimally better than the gameplay score.
And guess what i HAVE THE ORIGINAL FINAL FANTASY III OST and there are 44 tracks on it, how the hell can one say 44 tracks = not enough? escpecially for the NES era?
Perhaps there are way too many sections using the same track, especially sections that follow each other?
Quote
No one wants to know that? Well ALOT OF PEOPLE DO! and for a matter of fact I DO, and To Clear things up once more, all HE WAS USING WAS PHYSICAL DAMAGE, he Again didn't use Skills, Skills= IMPORTANT FACTOR IS DAMAGE.
and each different class has that
Quote
Is it really necessary to quote the entire post that you're responding to, when said post is directly above yours?? Damn, that is annoying. If you were doing a point-by-point rebuttal, I'd understand, but you're not.
Anyways, I agree with KDR about the "not wanting to know how he played" thing. This is a review, not a strategy guide.
And the part about needing to input all commands at once? You brought up Final Fantasy VI at this point. Well, I just wanted to say that you do NOT have to input everybody's command at once. There is a guage that shows you when a character's next turn to attack is. Same with FF IV.
In all of the FF games that I've played (FF1 nes, FF1 & 2 GBA, Mystiq Quest - LOL -, FFII & III snes), the only time that you can save anywhere is in the Overworld. You can do no such thing in a dungeon, cave, town, or castle.
And you think that the battle system is "perfect"? Maybe it is for you, but I would take the battle systems of Grandia, the Tales games, the Paper Marios, and the handheld Mario RPGs over it any day of the week. I also like Dragon Quest VIII's, because that series has a very special place in my heart. ::sniff:: The only FF battle system worth mentioning now is the one from FF VI, and that's only because of Sabin.QuoteNo one wants to know that? Well ALOT OF PEOPLE DO! and for a matter of fact I DO, and To Clear things up once more, all HE WAS USING WAS PHYSICAL DAMAGE, he Again didn't use Skills, Skills= IMPORTANT FACTOR IS DAMAGE.
and each different class has that[/qoute]
Oh really? And how did you find that out? And what are these skills that you are talking about? Is it like magic or something? Because, I seriously think that it is rather foolish to assume that a person would not use any magic to fight their battles with. The reviewer finished the game, did he not? Do you really think that it's possible to do so with just "PHYSICAL DAMAGE"?
Have you played the Final Fantasy IV GBA remake? Did you noticed how broken the battles were? Did you notice when the enemies would attack you 2-3 times before you can? That didn't happen when it was released as FF II for the SNES. The remake was buggy as hell. Maybe that's what happened to this remake. Perhaps it was rushed and the developers couldn't get all the bugs out.
About the scores on the FFIII OST. Were any of them remixes? If so, how many? Eh, I don't really care. The only FF music I care to listen to are from FF IV and VI.
Also, there indeed was NOT enough music in the Twin Snakes remake. They took out "Enclosure", the music that plays after you fight Sniper Wolf. That was the best music in the game and I was really looking forward to it after I defeated her. All I got was the sound of the wind. Boo-urns.
In answer to your first question, I think it is generally necessary, yes.
Quote
Originally posted by: wanderingQuote
Is it really necessary to quote the entire post that you're responding to, when said post is directly above yours?? Damn, that is annoying. If you were doing a point-by-point rebuttal, I'd understand, but you're not.
Anyways, I agree with KDR about the "not wanting to know how he played" thing. This is a review, not a strategy guide.
And the part about needing to input all commands at once? You brought up Final Fantasy VI at this point. Well, I just wanted to say that you do NOT have to input everybody's command at once. There is a guage that shows you when a character's next turn to attack is. Same with FF IV.
In all of the FF games that I've played (FF1 nes, FF1 & 2 GBA, Mystiq Quest - LOL -, FFII & III snes), the only time that you can save anywhere is in the Overworld. You can do no such thing in a dungeon, cave, town, or castle.
And you think that the battle system is "perfect"? Maybe it is for you, but I would take the battle systems of Grandia, the Tales games, the Paper Marios, and the handheld Mario RPGs over it any day of the week. I also like Dragon Quest VIII's, because that series has a very special place in my heart. ::sniff:: The only FF battle system worth mentioning now is the one from FF VI, and that's only because of Sabin.QuoteNo one wants to know that? Well ALOT OF PEOPLE DO! and for a matter of fact I DO, and To Clear things up once more, all HE WAS USING WAS PHYSICAL DAMAGE, he Again didn't use Skills, Skills= IMPORTANT FACTOR IS DAMAGE.
and each different class has that[/qoute]
Oh really? And how did you find that out? And what are these skills that you are talking about? Is it like magic or something? Because, I seriously think that it is rather foolish to assume that a person would not use any magic to fight their battles with. The reviewer finished the game, did he not? Do you really think that it's possible to do so with just "PHYSICAL DAMAGE"?
Have you played the Final Fantasy IV GBA remake? Did you noticed how broken the battles were? Did you notice when the enemies would attack you 2-3 times before you can? That didn't happen when it was released as FF II for the SNES. The remake was buggy as hell. Maybe that's what happened to this remake. Perhaps it was rushed and the developers couldn't get all the bugs out.
About the scores on the FFIII OST. Were any of them remixes? If so, how many? Eh, I don't really care. The only FF music I care to listen to are from FF IV and VI.
Also, there indeed was NOT enough music in the Twin Snakes remake. They took out "Enclosure", the music that plays after you fight Sniper Wolf. That was the best music in the game and I was really looking forward to it after I defeated her. All I got was the sound of the wind. Boo-urns.
In answer to your first question, I think it is generally necessary, yes.
I see.... Carry on then.
Quote
So unless you are bad at maths, your 'Final' score isn't really correct, unless it wasn't ment to be the average score of all your otehr scores. Strange, every review bases it's Final Score on all it's other scores.
Quote
Originally posted by: CericQuote
So unless you are bad at maths, your 'Final' score isn't really correct, unless it wasn't ment to be the average score of all your otehr scores. Strange, every review bases it's Final Score on all it's other scores.
Jerk.
It states clearly that it's not an average. It's an overall score. A category of its own. Pretty standard stuff.
If you don't like the review then go here and write your own. Thats why its here. It's not productive to condescendingly shred a good reviewers review down.
Don't agree with the review great. That's your opinion go for it. Please just go and review the game yourself. Give your own opinion it. But insulting people and the like is not something that should be done. People like you are what make the Internet a non-friendly place. Please, use a spell checker when writing something so long.
Quote
Originally posted by: Myxtika1 Azn
Is it really necessary to quote the entire post that you're responding to, when said post is directly above yours?? Damn, that is annoying. If you were doing a point-by-point rebuttal, I'd understand, but you're not. Nested quotes are annoying as hell as well, but I digress....
Anyways, I agree with KDR about the "not wanting to know how he played" thing. This is a review, not a strategy guide.
And the part about needing to input all commands at once? You brought up Final Fantasy VI at this point. Well, I just wanted to say that you do NOT have to input everybody's command at once. There is a guage that shows you when a character's next turn to attack is. Same with FF IV.
In all of the FF games that I've played (FF1 nes, FF1 & 2 GBA, Mystiq Quest - LOL -, FFII & III snes), the only time that you can save anywhere is in the Overworld. You can do no such thing in a dungeon, cave, town, or castle.
And you think that the battle system is "perfect"? Maybe it is for you, but I would take the battle systems of Grandia, the Tales games, the Paper Marios, and the handheld Mario RPGs over it any day of the week. I also like Dragon Quest VIII's, because that series has a very special place in my heart. ::sniff:: The only FF battle system worth mentioning now is the one from FF VI, and that's only because of Sabin.Quote
No one wants to know that? Well ALOT OF PEOPLE DO! and for a matter of fact I DO, and To Clear things up once more, all HE WAS USING WAS PHYSICAL DAMAGE, he Again didn't use Skills, Skills= IMPORTANT FACTOR IS DAMAGE.
and each different class has that
Oh really? And how did you find that out? And what are these skills that you are talking about? Is it like magic or something? Because, I seriously think that it is rather foolish to assume that a person would not use any magic to fight their battles with. The reviewer finished the game, did he not? Do you really think that it's possible to do so with just "PHYSICAL DAMAGE"?
Have you played the Final Fantasy IV GBA remake? Did you noticed how broken the battles were? Did you notice when the enemies would attack you 2-3 times before you can? That didn't happen when it was released as FF II for the SNES. The remake was buggy as hell. Maybe that's what happened to this remake. Perhaps it was rushed and the developers couldn't get all the bugs out.
About the scores on the FFIII OST. Were any of them remixes? If so, how many? Eh, I don't really care. The only FF music I care to listen to are from FF IV and VI.
Also, there indeed was NOT enough music in the Twin Snakes remake. They took out "Enclosure", the music that plays after you fight Sniper Wolf. That was the best music in the game and I was really looking forward to it after I defeated her. All I got was the sound of the wind. Boo-urns.
Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing
Because "enough" music is a definite number and all.
Guys, seriously, let's shut up.
Quote
Originally posted by: fireyhope
i agree with most of what you said, but i can already tell you are a FFVI and FFV fanboy.
Quote
Personally i like FFVII and FFX much more because old school graphics do not entrance me as much as 2d
Quote
saying that you are completely wrong saying that there were not enough tracks in MGS twin snakes because MGS twin snakes had remixed music and had music at all the same spots.
Quote
Originally posted by: fireyhope Famitsu are good reviewers
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
The Japanese clearly like things in games that American gamers likely just won't care for. Ergo, Famitsu scores are 100% meaningless to the American gamer.
Quote
And besides. Do you actually believe Square Enix would be so stupid to make this game boring like Hell by forcing you to train and gain 10 levels for each boss?
Quote
Originally posted by: annoying
Also, I'm wondering hwo teh story is predictable? So you knew from the beginning Zande was behind the sinking of the crystals, but that it was actually The Cloud of Darkness, which came forth from the void when light and dark were unbalanced, who controlled Zande? Wow! You continue to amaze me!
Quote
It's used in almost every review that the Final score is always based on it's other scores.
If it isn't here, that's too bad, and also an easy way to givve a game a low score if the reviewer doesn't like the game.
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
The people who gave Nintendogs a flawless score
Quote
Originally posted by: wanderingQuote
Originally posted by: annoying
Also, I'm wondering hwo teh story is predictable? So you knew from the beginning Zande was behind the sinking of the crystals, but that it was actually The Cloud of Darkness, which came forth from the void when light and dark were unbalanced, who controlled Zande? Wow! You continue to amaze me!
Hey, thanks for spoiling the story! I was planning on picking this game up, but now I don't think I will!Quote
It's used in almost every review that the Final score is always based on it's other scores.
If it isn't here, that's too bad, and also an easy way to givve a game a low score if the reviewer doesn't like the game.
Because good graphics make up for bad gameplay? Christ. NO reputable reviewer that I know does what you suggest.
The review is is a good one because it makes it clear exactly what the game is: a wolf in sheep's clothing. Ancient game design wrapped in a modern game's clothing. This is good thing for anyone to know, whether they'd be interested in that sort of thing, like you obviously are, or not.Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
The people who gave Nintendogs a flawless score
...for being flawless, which it is?
Quote
Originally posted by: annoying
Read reviews on gamespot, read reviews on eyesonff, read reviews on ING, always the Final Scores are based on the other scores.
Quote
And did I say godo graphics make up for bad gameplay?
Quote
But you [deleted] blindly start believing what this reviewer says. Unless you've played the game, of course, in which case I take my words back and say each to his own opinion.
Quote
Only blind VII-fann00bs can be fooled that way.
Quote
Originally posted by: wanderingQuote
Originally posted by: annoying
Read reviews on gamespot, read reviews on eyesonff, read reviews on ING, always the Final Scores are based on the other scores.
Gamespot does, but they have a special 'tilt' score they use just for manipulating the final score. IGN (I assume you mean IGN) does not.Quote
And did I say godo graphics make up for bad gameplay?
No, you just said you wanted the review to achieve a higer score by averging the scores of all the categories. Since the only reason this would make the score higher is that the graphics got such a good score, you are, essentially, saying that good graphics should make up for bad gameplay. (This is bad gameplay, of course, from the perspective of the reviewer. I understand you think the reviewer doesn't know what he's talking about and that the gameplay score is unfair. I hope you understand a system where the reviewer is forced to give a game a high score even when he personally doesn't feel the game is good would make no sense.)Quote
But you [deleted] blindly start believing what this reviewer says. Unless you've played the game, of course, in which case I take my words back and say each to his own opinion.
I never blindly believe what a reviewer says. I assume he isn't lying when he says the game was frustrating for him to play. I assume I, someone less experienced in rpgs than he, will also find the game frustrating, for the reasons he lists. I don't think either of these assumptions are blind or stupid.
Oh, and also, I'm still planning on buying the game.Quote
Only blind VII-fann00bs can be fooled that way.
Your logic is irrefutable.
Quote
Originally posted by: ArbokQuote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
The Japanese clearly like things in games that American gamers likely just won't care for. Ergo, Famitsu scores are 100% meaningless to the American gamer.
Way to stereotype...
Quote
...for being flawless, which it is?
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
In the US, it ain't so much of an issue, and in the US, sports games and FPSs sell insanely well while Japan doesn't much care for them.
Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok Right, because joe average "Madden and FPS' for me!" would even know what Famitsu is...
Making the assumption that "Famitsu scores are 100% meaningless to the American gamer" on that stance is pretty poor. Cultures are different everywhere, but using that basis to completely rule out another reviewing source is pretty fool hearted. I guess Ocarina of Time wasn't that great of a game either, if Famitsu was so into it to give it a perfect score... or at least it would be good for those Japanese, but not us red blooded Americans.
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
How do YOU know the game is a wolf in sheep's clothing? You've played it yourself? Understood everything and the whole yada yada? If so, well, seems to be your opinion. But, I think, I can be wrong, you have NOT played it, so again, you all base your rip-it-to-shreds-god-damn-it! replies on this review.
I thought that was the common point of agreement between all parties that FF3 is a very faithful remake gameplay-wise which the "wolf in sheep's fur" comment was about (an old game that looks like a modern one at first glance)? FF3's remake approach should not be confused with Metroid Zero Mission's (which remade a pretty awful game into a great one with an annoying stealth sequence).
Quote
No, you just said you wanted the review to achieve a higer score by averging the scores of all the categories. Since the only reason this would make the score higher is that the graphics got such a good score, you are, essentially, saying that good graphics should make up for bad gameplay. (This is bad gameplay, of course, from the perspective of the reviewer. I understand you think the reviewer doesn't know what he's talking about and that the gameplay score is unfair. I hope you understand a system where the reviewer is forced to give a game a high score even when he personally doesn't feel the game is good would make no sense.)
Quote
Originally posted by: Myxtika1 Azn
Ah geez, not this crap again!
You got this game TODAY, you say? Is this the US one, or the Japanese one? Unless you've played the Japanese one, please shut the hell up. Do you even know if there have been any changes made to the localized game? Perhaps it was made "easier" due to complaints? I don't know, and I'm going say that you don't either.
Don't go and say that the reviewer can't "play for crap" unless you've had first hand experience with the JPN copy. The only thing that's crap here, is your blind fanboyish attitude.
Quote
Originally posted by: Refia
I find it funny. People on eyesonff read this review too and almost every reaction was like "Lolz, that guys sucks if he thinks FF III is hard", or something among those lines. But don't worry rip-FF-III-DS-to-shreds'ers, there were some people who didn't care, and some people who could agree on some points. So you shouldn't worry, you won't get the entire FF III-fan army after you.
Quote
Originally posted by: wanderingQuote
Originally posted by: Refia
I find it funny. People on eyesonff read this review too and almost every reaction was like "Lolz, that guys sucks if he thinks FF III is hard", or something among those lines. But don't worry rip-FF-III-DS-to-shreds'ers, there were some people who didn't care, and some people who could agree on some points. So you shouldn't worry, you won't get the entire FF III-fan army after you.
Here's the thread, if anyone's curious. I am amused by the undying hatred "real" FF fans seem to have of FFVII fans.
Quote
Originally posted by: fireyhope
IT's THE EXACT SAME FRIGGIN GAME!
Quote
Originally posted by: fireyhope
again i must say i'm just fought the second or third boss of the game and it's too easy!
I had a 3 black Mages and 1 White Mage they were about lvl11 and i whooped on the boss.
i was in the cave with the dragon
and honestly this guy who wrote this review can't play for crap.
I've been playing RPG's for a while now and FFIII is one of the EASIEST games i have played so far.
The difficulty is heavily exagerated and the person who played it obviously didn't know what to do in the battle to defeat the boss