Poll
Question:
Option 1: Graphics
votes: 1
Option 2: Gameplay
votes: 10
Option 3: Music (:'()
votes: 0
Option 4: Other
votes: 0
I'm probably biased, but I think music might rival gameplay in terms of importance. goowan
for instance, i'm not sure the early megaman games would be nearly as enjoyable without their excellent soundtracks befuddlement
Anyway, the two most important to me are gameplay and music, though attractive graphics and everything else can certainly add to the experience. sillydood;
Graphigs
Story
Gameplay
gameplay
if a game is in a genre that i don't like, then i automatically won't play it 5thgrade;
well, gameplay is most important of course. and i definitely disagree with the idea that mega man wouldn't be nearly as enjoyable without the music. the music is definitely a factor, but the point is the gameplay. it's challenging and fun as can be.
if you can't enjoy a video game that doesn't have some kind of complex rpg story then you're an idiot
i don't anyone who said "story" as one of theirs meant that they can't enjoy a game without a complex rpg story, nyerp
i should mention that i'd put gameplay above music but they're still close (http://boyah.net/forums/Themes/smokes2/images/post/angry.gif)
Story doesn't matter at all, and attractive graphics graphics can help, but really aren't necessary either. I would never force myself through a chore of a game if it happened to have an amazing story and incredible graphics. goodjob;
I don't see how a game with an incredible story can possibly be a chore confuseddood;
I'd say gameplay, story, and competitiveness are what drives me towards a game. I really like well-written games such as Mass Effect but then I also really enjoy games such as CoD or NHL online because they have great multiplayer systems in place
competitiveness is on the very bottom on the list for me goodjob;
Quote from: YPR on August 07, 2011, 01:35:18 PM
I don't see how a game with an incredible story can possibly be a chore confuseddood;
a great story doesn't necessarily make a game a chore, but it seems like often games with "amazing" stories are absolutely boring to play
like many, many jrpgs sillydood;
...jrpgs are the best games....
Quote from: Nyerp on August 07, 2011, 01:39:34 PM
competitiveness is on the very bottom on the list for me goodjob;
me2 5thgrade;
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 01:41:53 PM
a great story doesn't necessarily make a game a chore, but it seems like often games with "amazing" stories are absolutely boring to play
like many, many jrpgs sillydood;
wow rude
and wrong imo
>jrpgs
>amazing stories
lolwat
I like competing against people because it's more satisfying to outwit a person than a pre-programmed opponent with certain patterns
Quote from: Nyerp on August 07, 2011, 01:45:37 PM
>jrpgs
>amazing stories
lolwat
Seriously, I'm confused as well
i think that the days of jrpgs having great stories pretty much ended last generation and isn't coming back in any big way any time soon
well, many jrpgs seem to have convoluted-in-an-attempt-to-be-amazing stories, and that seems close enough girl;
Quote from: Suigintou on August 07, 2011, 01:49:45 PM
i think that the days of jrpgs having great stories pretty much ended last generation and isn't coming back in any big way any time soon
eh, the days of jrpgs having great
anything have p. much ended girl;
but the jrpgs of past days will always have a place in my heart :'(
i could be biased against jrpgs because i didn't grow up on the ps1 or ps2 and by the time i became an owner of a sony console, jrpgs had died sillydood;
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 02:02:26 PM
i could be biased against jrpgs because i didn't grow up on the ps1 or ps2 and now that i do own a sony console, jrpgs are dead sillydood;
probs baddood;
also
>growing up on the ps2
lol you're so young sillydood;
...oh god, i was only 7 when the ps2 came out :(
the n64 was my first console and is the oldest one i've ever owned sillydood;
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 02:02:26 PM
i could be biased against jrpgs because i didn't grow up on the ps1 or ps2 and by the time i became an owner of a sony console, jrpgs had died sillydood;
nor did i
but i still like good jrpgs
Quote from: Thyme on August 07, 2011, 01:54:41 PM
eh, the days of jrpgs having great anything have p. much ended girl;
but the jrpgs of past days will always have a place in my heart :'(
if you say so
ff13 was decent and this generation's Tales game (that actually got released here) is actually my favorite in the series and Valkyria Chronicles is amazing and FFTA2 is pretty awesome
Quote from: Suigintou on August 07, 2011, 03:09:29 PM
nor did i
but i still like good jrpgs
well i missed the snes too awdood;
[spoiler]>mfw the snes, ps1 and ps2 are considered the best consoles of their respective generations goowan[/spoiler]
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 03:11:18 PM
well i missed the snes too awdood;
lol you youngster
but back in the day i didn't play jrpgs on that console either. i only started playing jrpgs when i got a bit older. well except for mario rpg. i played that when i was young. it was really the only rpg i played when i was little, actually.
i think the first jrpg other than that that i actually bothered with was when i emulated ff6 and chrono trigger when i was like 14.
as a whole though i really don't play as many jrpgs as you'd think and i have no bias for or against them either way really
i just play good games
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 01:50:23 PM
well, many jrpgs seem to have convoluted-in-an-attempt-to-be-amazing stories, and that seems close enough girl;
so do the metal gear games and you love those sillydood;
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 02:02:26 PM
i could be biased against jrpgs because i didn't grow up on the ps1 or ps2 and by the time i became an owner of a sony console, jrpgs had died sillydood;
uhhhhh neither did i but i still can enjoy a good final fantasy game goonish
Quote from: Nyerp on August 07, 2011, 03:59:33 PM
so do the metal gear games and you love those sillydood;
yes, but those actually have enjoyable gameplay goowan
[spoiler]and i've never really played a final fantasy game but i plan on changing that THE POWER OF GOD[/spoiler]
also even if you weren't raised on sony consoles and missed the snes there's no excuse for not having played the paper mario/m&l games :'(
[spoiler]I think I have trouble enjoying turn-based strategy games. smithicide;[/spoiler]
it just seems like such an archaic, unnecessary, overly complicated way to do things :'(
wow great job ignoring my previous post :|
and yes i don't like those either
Quote from: Nyerp on August 07, 2011, 04:14:28 PM
wow great job ignoring my previous post :|
and yes i don't like those either
what
aren't the paper mario and m&l games turn-based lol
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 04:16:11 PM
what
aren't the paper mario and m&l games turn-based lol
uh yes but they're not turn-based
strategy and in no way are they overly complicated wtf goonish
no they're not complicated but i still feel there's too much menu navigation :|
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 04:22:37 PM
no they're not complicated but i still feel there's too much menu navigation :|
lol what the hell no there is not
Maybe I should give them another chance, but the battle systems in the Paper Mario/M&L games have never really appealed to me. :'(
those games have the most appealing battle systems of any rpg i've ever played because they're so simple and don't rely on you just selecting something from a menu :|
so if you don't like them you'll probably never like any other jrpg imo
...too much menu navigation in paper mario?
wow lol
lol srs
i can probably count the number of turn-based games i've played on my hands, but i don't think i've ever finished any of the ones i've started because i feel like i'm forcing myself through them :'(
pokemon soulsilver
super mario rpg
mario and luigi: partners in time
paper mario ttyd
final fantasy 3
probs. some others
smithicide;
This is painful for me to admit. awdood;
Quote from: Suigintou on August 07, 2011, 04:40:23 PM
...too much menu navigation in paper mario?
wow lol
imo any menu navigation during battles is too much as it is completely unnecessary in this day and age :'(
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 04:43:18 PM
i can probably count the number of turn-based games i've played on my hands, but i don't think i've ever finished any of the ones i've started because i feel like i'm forcing myself through them :'(
pokemon soulsilver
super mario rpg
mario and luigi: partners in time
paper mario ttyd
final fantasy 3
probs. some others
smithicide;
This is painful for me to admit. awdood;
partners in time???? ew ew ew ew ew EW play the first one first :| :|
ehhh if you're new to final fantasy i would advise against playing 3 because it is hard as all hell and really archaic
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 04:44:20 PM
imo any menu navigation during battles is too much as it is completely unnecessary in this day and age :'(
oh come the fuck on, that's just you denying the worth of an entire genre of video games because they're different than what you're used to and wow i shouldn't be talking here lol
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 04:10:28 PM
[spoiler]I think I have trouble enjoying turn-based strategy games. smithicide;[/spoiler]
it just seems like such an archaic, unnecessary, overly complicated way to do things :'(
I love turn based strategy games
they are one of my favourites
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 04:44:20 PM
imo any menu navigation during battles is too much as it is completely unnecessary in this day and age :'(
no it's not unnecessary because that destroys the entire genre group that is any rpg that's not an action rpg
it's hard to explain, but there IS an appeal to turn-based battle. more control over strategy and such. if you don't see the appeal that's fine but trust me, whether it's "necessary" or not isn't the point
Quote from: Nyerp on August 07, 2011, 04:48:16 PM
oh come the fuck on, that's just you denying the worth of an entire genre of video games because they're different than what you're used to
i know
i knowI've never mentioned that I have trouble with turn-based battle systems before because I realize some of those games, even many of the ones I mentioned in my other post, are considered
great, and it makes me feel horrible. :'(
Well speaking of strategy, I've never been into RTS games much, I'd say mostly because it's a very PC-centric genre.
Quote from: Suigintou on August 07, 2011, 04:51:04 PM
no it's not unnecessary because that destroys the entire genre group that is any rpg that's not an action rpg
i think what actually puts me off is menu navigation lol
modern turn-based games don't need to rely on menus, actions could easily be mapped to buttons >.<
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 04:57:34 PM
i think what actually puts me off is menu navigation lol
modern turn-based games don't need to rely on menus, actions could easily be mapped to buttons >.<
well, you could TRY an action rpg if you want
but i am not well versed in them other than the Tales series so i can't help you out there unless it's Tales lol
Quote from: Thyme on August 07, 2011, 04:57:26 PM
Well speaking of strategy, I've never been into RTS games much, I'd say mostly because it's a very PC-centric genre.
well, what about strategy rpgs that are more like Disgaea, FF Tactics, Valkyria Chronicles, etc?
i prefer those types of games over what most people think of as "RTS" although they're obviously similar
Quote from: Suigintou on August 07, 2011, 04:58:58 PM
well, you could TRY an action rpg if you want
but i am not well versed in them other than the Tales series so i can't help you out there unless it's Tales lol
action rpgs are more doable
but i think i could
definitely enjoy turn-based games more regularly if menus (WHICH ARE ENTIRELY UNNECESSARY) were eliminated
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 04:57:34 PM
i think what actually puts me off is menu navigation lol
modern turn-based games don't need to rely on menus, actions could easily be mapped to buttons >.<
You'd probs still need a hud of some sort that shows you what action is mapped to which button, so at that point there wouldn't be that much of a difference, especially if there are sub-actions behind each actions. That hud ends up being pretty much a menu, even if you navigate through it differently.
Quote from: Thyme on August 07, 2011, 04:57:26 PM
Well speaking of strategy, I've never been into RTS games much, I'd say mostly because it's a very PC-centric genre.
I like real time strategy don't get me wrong, but my god I suck at most of them so it is really hard for me to get into them. The strategy stuff I have down but the actual implication of said strategies never works out n_u
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 04:57:34 PM
i think what actually puts me off is menu navigation lol
modern turn-based games don't need to rely on menus, actions could easily be mapped to buttons >.<
Well if you play them on a pc they are ;)
there simply aren't enough buttons on a console controller to map all the possible choices to it and make it be intuitive and easy to use
Quote from: Thyme on August 07, 2011, 05:02:46 PM
You'd probs still need a hud of some sort that shows you what action is mapped to which button, so at that point there wouldn't be that much of a difference, especially if there are sub-actions behind each actions. That hud ends up being pretty much a menu, even if you navigate through it differently.
couldn't the player just memorize what certain buttons or button combinations do like the player is expected to do with most other games >.<
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 04:57:34 PM
i think what actually puts me off is menu navigation lol
modern turn-based games don't need to rely on menus, actions could easily be mapped to buttons >.<
but that severely limits the amount of attacks that you can do and that's no fun psyduck;
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 05:05:30 PM
couldn't the player just memorize what certain buttons or button combinations do like the player is expected to do with most other games >.<
Quote from: Nyerp on August 07, 2011, 05:05:50 PM
but that severely limits the amount of attacks that you can do and that's no fun psyduck;
^^^^
That, and that would be a decent system only with a one-character party, which most turn-based rpgs aren't.
Quote from: Nyerp on August 07, 2011, 05:05:50 PM
but that severely limits the amount of attacks that you can do and that's no fun psyduck;
Yeah, if not the combinations would be insane and near impossible to remember
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 05:05:30 PM
couldn't the player just memorize what certain buttons or button combinations do like the player is expected to do with most other games >.<
they could, but that would limit things extremely
how could you choose which magic spell to use, out of a list, if you can't have a menu? just an example.
i mean, the Tales series makes it so you choose which moves you want mapped to button+directional commands BEFOREHAND, and it's up to you to remember them or check them in a battle (or change them, but in most battles you're not going to pause the action at all except to maybe use an item)
but not ALL rpgs can be that way. it would just oversimplify things. it would eliminate a great deal of the strategy.
(http://i.imgur.com/qpP6y.png)
Quote from: Suigintou on August 07, 2011, 05:08:56 PM
they could, but that would limit things extremely
how could you choose which magic spell to use, out of a list, if you can't have a menu? just an example.
face buttons alone for standard attacks, l1 + face buttons for magic attacks, l2 + face buttons for x actions, r1 + face buttons for y actions, r2 + face buttons for z actions, etc.
I don't think that'd be too difficult. I think menus can be circumvented. :'(
Though, yeah, it might limit the number of characters each player has control of to one, but then we could encourage multiplayer RPGs. :'(
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 05:18:31 PM
face buttons alone for standard attacks, l1 + face buttons for magic attacks, l2 + face buttons for x actions, r1 + face buttons for y actions, r2 + face buttons for z actions, etc.
I don't think that'd be too difficult. I think menus can be circumvented. :'(
Though, yeah, it might limit the number of characters each player has control of to one, but then we could encourage multiplayer RPGs. :'(
that doesn't change the fact that you'd need a menu to select WHICH magic attack or something like that
To be clear, I don't think we can eliminate menus entirely. I just don't think they're necessary for battling.
menus are for items :'(
Quote from: Suigintou on August 07, 2011, 05:20:05 PM
that doesn't change the fact that you'd need a menu to select WHICH magic attack or something like that
Each magic attack would be mapped to a certain face button, but L1 would have to be depressed in order for it to register as a magic attack and not a standard attack. sillydood;
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 05:18:31 PM
face buttons alone for standard attacks, l1 + face buttons for magic attacks, l2 + face buttons for x actions, r1 + face buttons for y actions, r2 + face buttons for z actions, etc.
I don't think that'd be too difficult. I think menus can be circumvented. :'(
Though, yeah, it might limit the number of characters each player has control of to one, but then we could encourage multiplayer RPGs. :'(
uh wow lol just drop it tec wariodood;
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 05:21:36 PM
Each magic attack would be mapped to a certain face button, but L1 would have to be depressed in order for it to register as a magic attack and not a standard attack. sillydood;
This is so much more complicated than
magic > earth magic > earthquake
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 05:21:36 PM
Each magic attack would be mapped to a certain face button, but L1 would have to be depressed in order for it to register as a magic attack and not a standard attack. sillydood;
oh okay
i mean yeah this is all possible and all but to be honest simply navigating a menu is easier and thus more efficient lol
Quote from: Squid Girl on August 07, 2011, 05:22:44 PM
This is so much more complicated than
magic > earth magic > earthquake
it often doesn't even go that far
magic > blizzara
Quote from: Suigintou on August 07, 2011, 05:10:45 PM
SO COMPLICATED
it definitely slows the flow of the game down awdood;
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 05:25:56 PM
it definitely slows the flow of the game down awdood;
it's turn-based, you're going to wait anyway
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 05:24:52 PM
which could be mapped to
l1 + b
:'(
but what about
fire
fira
firaga
blizzard
blizzaga
thunder
thundara
thundaga
poison
poisonga
quake
ultima
and on
and on
and on
most rpgs have so many varying strategies BECAUSE they have so many different spells/attacks/special things of other sorts
the face buttons on a typical controller could not really hope to capture the amount of stuff you can do in most popular rpgs
Quote from: Thyme on August 07, 2011, 05:26:45 PM
it's turn-based, you're going to wait anyway
indeed
Quote from: Thyme on August 07, 2011, 05:26:45 PM
it's turn-based, you're going to wait anyway
yes, but i think waiting time could be reduced by mapping attacks to buttons >.<
Especially with a game like Pokemon where each Pokemon is limited to four attacks. :(
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 05:28:57 PM
yes, but i think waiting time could be reduced by mapping attacks to buttons >.<
Especially with a game like Pokemon where each Pokemon is limited to four attacks. :(
with pokemon, it is definitely possible
with most other rpgs, not so much
it's an idea to keep in mind for future streamlined rpgs that could maybe benefit from it, but it will not work for MOST
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 05:28:57 PM
yes, but i think waiting time could be reduced by mapping attacks to buttons >.<
Especially with a game like Pokemon where each Pokemon is limited to four attacks. :(
but what about doing anything else
hey tec if you want a nice, streamlined wait-based jrpg then play final fantasy 13
you don't even have to choose your own attacks!!! :D
Quote from: Suigintou on August 07, 2011, 05:27:26 PM
but what about
fire
fira
firaga
blizzard
blizzaga
thunder
thundara
thundaga
poison
poisonga
quake
ultima
and on
and on
and on
that's so much menu navigation and probably the type of game i'd avoid at all costs >.<
But I think Nintendo's turn-based RPGs, at the very least, could benefit from eliminating menus as there typically isn't a wide variety of attacks to choose from anyway. goowan
Quote from: Nyerp on August 07, 2011, 05:33:51 PM
but what about doing anything else
anything else like what befuddlement
Quote from: Nyerp on August 07, 2011, 05:37:16 PMyou don't even have to choose your own attacks!!! :D
lol what goowan
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 05:38:05 PM
anything else like what befuddlement
items, balls, other options????????????
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 05:37:29 PM
that's so much menu navigation and probably the type of game i'd avoid at all costs >.<
But I think Nintendo's turn-based RPGs, at the very least, could benefit from eliminating menus as there typically isn't a wide variety of attacks to choose from anyway. goowan
you realize most jrpgs have a feature that lets the menu memorize where you last were right?
and no, no they wouldn't; it would really just serve to make the gameplay less intuitive overall and more frustrating
i now realize that people like you are the reason why super paper mario was made
i hate you :)
Quote from: Nyerp on August 07, 2011, 05:41:05 PM
items, balls, other options????????????
i'm just talking about attacks
Menus are perfectly acceptable for items and whatnot. n_u
Quote from: Nyerp on August 07, 2011, 05:41:05 PM
you realize most jrpgs have a feature that lets the menu memorize where you last were right?
and no, no they wouldn't; it would really just serve to make the gameplay less intuitive overall and more frustrating
i now realize that people like you are the reason why super paper mario was made
i'm not arguing against the turn-based aspect of the games, just the usage of menus to select attacks
I understand that some games
need to be turn-based, and I have no problem with that, but I don't understand the need for menus to select attacks unless there's a
really huge number of attacks to choose from. myface;
Quote from: Nyerp on August 07, 2011, 05:41:05 PM
i hate you :)
:'(
Honestly, I wouldn't want to play a game like that.
Quote from: Thyme on August 07, 2011, 05:51:23 PM
Honestly, I wouldn't want to play a game like that.
Yeah I think that would be reason enough for me to skip over laying a game
but most games are like that (attacks mapped to buttons, everything else in menus), the only difference is that these would still be turn-based :'(
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 05:54:58 PM
but most games are like that (attacks mapped to buttons, everything else in menus), the only difference is that these would still be turn-based :'(
big-ass difference
FFVI 4 best jrpg story
Quote from: Thyme on August 07, 2011, 05:56:05 PM
big-ass difference
which is what :'(
I just don't understand why developers would treat attacks as secondary features during RPG battles when in most cases they're necessary at all times and immediate access to them (via buttons) would simplify things. Healing items and such aren't always necessary and I wouldn't object to them being placed in a menu, but immediately necessary attacks don't need to be tucked away in menus. :'(
Even if an RPG has so many attacks that it'd be impossible to map them all to buttons, a handful that are used most often could be mapped to buttons with the more specific ones that aren't used as frequently available in menus. :'(
having a mish-mash game design of button commands and menu commands is honestly just messy and overly complicated
deal w/ it
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 04:57:34 PM
>.<
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 05:05:30 PM
>.<
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 05:18:31 PM
:'(
:'(
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 05:20:10 PM
:'(
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 05:24:52 PM
:'(
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 05:28:57 PM
>.<
:(
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 05:37:29 PM
>.<
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 05:46:28 PM
myface;
:'(
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 05:54:58 PM
:'(
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 06:08:57 PM
:'(
:'(
:'(
stop it tec you're hurting yourself over this :'(
Quote from: Thyme on August 07, 2011, 06:19:03 PM
stop it tec you're hurting yourself over this :'(
if you look at the food thread like that then tec is long dead goowan
Quote from: Nyerp on August 07, 2011, 06:21:09 PM
if you look at the food thread like that then tec is long dead goowan
hearty laughs were had goowan
final say:
tec is overly picky and demands too much and obviously simply hasn't really given rpgs an actual chance
the end :)
oh god lol goowan
But seriously, in turn-based RPGs, especially those with few attacks like Nintendo's, why couldn't common attacks be mapped to buttons and everything else that's not immediately necessary be left in menus? :(
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 06:23:45 PM
oh god lol goowan
But seriously, in turn-based RPGs, especially those with few attacks like Nintendo's, why couldn't common attacks be mapped to buttons and everything else that's not immediately necessary be left in menus? :(
[spoiler]there aren't very many with few attacks[/spoiler]
even paper mario has an abundance of selections for each kind of attack (jump, hammer, special) and it would just be a waste of time to have to map them all to certain buttons and even worse to have to restrict yourself in battle in such a simple game
Quote from: Suigintou on August 07, 2011, 06:22:55 PM
tec is overly picky and demands too much and obviously simply hasn't really given rpgs an actual chance
perhaps, but that's because the menu-oriented battle system turns me off :'(
In any case, I plan on playing some of the more well-received RPGs like earlier Final Fantasy titles, and perhaps I'll try some of Nintendo's RPGs again. If I still can't get used to the battle system after that, then I guess it's hopeless. smithicide;
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 06:45:03 PM
the more well-received RPGs like earlier Final Fantasy titles
the most well received final fantasy title ever is ff7, just so you know
Quote from: Nyerp on August 07, 2011, 06:52:53 PM
the most well received final fantasy title ever is ff7, just so you know
yes, i suppose that's what i should play first n_u
NO!!! DONT!!!! PLAY FOUR FIRST!!!!!
seven, four, nine
idk where to start akudood;
nine is better if you play the other ones, because it references itself a lot. FFIV is fun/good story. so is ffvii though...
It depends on the genre though game play is at LEAST always second. If I'm playing an RPG, story is very important. If I'm playing an action game, game play is more important. If I'm playing a rhythm game, music is most important. ect.
Quote from: Tectrika on August 07, 2011, 07:46:24 PM
seven, four, nine
idk where to start akudood;
six or seven
six is the most well-liked representative of "old final fantasy" and seven is the same for "new final fantasy" (even if they might not be the best games from those "eras")
Gameplay. If you pick graphics, I hate you.
Quote from: Snowy Deluxe on August 08, 2011, 09:15:49 AM
Seven, Four, Five, Nine, Six, Three
Not in any order, but start with Nine, Five, or Seven.
i think you're the only person ever to recommend five as a possible starting point
kind of a weird choice
all of the above plus voice acting [if it has it] cjlubdoods;
Quote from: Maester86 on August 08, 2011, 11:41:28 AM
all of the above plus voice acting [if it has it] cjlubdoods;
i can name so many more good games without voice acting than good games with it
Quote from: Suigintou on August 08, 2011, 11:44:30 AM
i can name so many more good games without voice acting than good games with it
LOOK AT THE EDIT
Quote from: Maester86 on August 08, 2011, 11:41:28 AM
all of the above plus voice acting [if it has it] cjlubdoods;
video games almost never have really good voice acting goonish
Quote from: Nyerp on August 08, 2011, 11:54:22 AM
video games almost never have really good voice acting goonish
decent voice acting is leagues better than awful voice acting goowan
Quote from: Nyerp on August 08, 2011, 11:54:22 AM
video games almost never have really good voice acting goonish
now bear my arctic blast
Quote from: Suigintou on August 08, 2011, 12:32:38 PM
now bear my arctic blast
i hope my body can take it RUB IT
i should probably mention that story alone, if truly good enough, can make a game enjoyable, as the entire ace attorney series relies entirely on story, but ace attorney is one of the very rare exceptions to the rule goowan
Great graphics isn't necessarily high-polygon, realistic, and HD. Especially with 2D games and cartoonish 3D games, it can be about the art style, creative character/setting designs, and quality of animation n_n
I'd say that gameplay is the most important aspect in most games, except visual novel-like games (including Ace Attorney), where story is more important. I'm not familiar with rhythm games, but perhaps they could be another exception in which music is more important than gameplay.
I once played MapleStory and I'd say that its music and art are great, but it's not worth playing because of dull and slow gameplay
Quote from: Nyerp on August 08, 2011, 11:54:22 AM
video games almost never have really good voice acting goonish
Don't English-translated games very often share voice actors with the anime dubs you prefer so much over the original Japanese voices? goowan
Quote from: bluika on August 09, 2011, 03:37:46 PM
Great graphics isn't necessarily high-polygon, realistic, and HD. Especially with 2D games and cartoonish 3D games, it can be about the art style, creative character/setting designs, and quality of animation n_n
oh definitely
that's why wind waker is one of the most beautiful-looking games ever created
Quote from: bluika on August 09, 2011, 03:37:46 PM
Don't English-translated games very often share voice actors with the anime dubs you prefer so much over the original Japanese voices? goowan
what the fuck?
also yes overall aesthetic is more important than graphical prowess, which is why even though games like the wind waker and okami don't have the best graphics
per se, they still look more appealing than say gays of war or cawadoody
brown 'n' bloom may attempt to make a game look more "realistic" (even though they fucking don't at all), but that doesn't mean it looks more
appealing~imo~
Quote from: bluika on August 09, 2011, 03:37:46 PM
Great graphics isn't necessarily high-polygon, realistic, and HD. Especially with 2D games and cartoonish 3D games, it can be about the art style, creative character/setting designs, and quality of animation n_n
I'd say that gameplay is the most important aspect in most games, except visual novel-like games (including Ace Attorney), where story is more important. I'm not familiar with rhythm games, but perhaps they could be another exception in which music is more important than gameplay.
I once played MapleStory and I'd say that its music and art are great, but it's not worth playing because of dull and slow gameplay
yes, but unfortunately "good graphics" is usually taken to mean high-polygon ultra-realism (which is why people often say "the wii has horrible graphics" when the reality is any game on any console can have "great graphics" or look absolutely horrible despite the polygon count)
many of the wii's games have more attractive graphics than brown&bloom ultra-"realistic" "next-gen" games, but in the sheer graphical power sense, wii games do have lower-tech graphics
still, that doesn't necessarily mean they're uglier than hd titles, as even a game as old, simple, and low-tech as oracle of ages still looks infinitely more attractive than something cutting-edge like resistance which is
entirely brown giggle;
well-done realism is definitely an accomplishment too though. it all depends on style and how it's presented, really.
Quote from: Nyerp on August 07, 2011, 06:33:12 PMand even worse to have to restrict yourself in battle in such a simple game
but it would be no more restrictive than it already is
common actions would be mapped to buttons while those used less frequently would remain in menus like they already are :'(
i think a turn-based game designed with this in mind could work :'(
Quote from: Tectrika on August 11, 2011, 08:48:58 PM
but it would be no more restrictive than it already is
common actions would be mapped to buttons while those used less frequently would remain in menus like they already are :'(
i think a turn-based game designed with this in mind could work :'(
In something like Mario&Luigi or Paper Mario, you mean that when the block-based "menu" is displayed for Jump/Hammer/Special/Item/etc, pressing X or Y would immediately select Hammer or Jump respectively no matter which block is currently selected?
I suppose that would be nice, but it's no more than a little shortcut. You'd still have to select which enemy to attack and, when badges are equipped, you'd still have to select which type of jump or hammer attack. There's no sane way to do those without menus.
Have you seen the battle system in Super Mario RPG? Instead of scrolling in a menu to select the basic Attack/Special/Item/Etc functions, one function is mapped to each of the four face buttons.
[spoiler=from the game's manual](http://i.imgur.com/Yai71.png)[/spoiler]
yep, but even so, you still need a menu to select which special, which item, which enemy to attack, etc.
Quote from: Hiroshi Yamauci, Former President of Nintendo"People who play RPGs are depressed gamers who like to sit alone in their dark rooms and play slow games."
spam;
[spoiler]ohgodsettledownidon'tactuallyagreewithhim myface;[/spoiler]