Slashdot Mirror


Final Fantasy XII U.S. Demo

Tim Butler writes "1UP has posted a massive blowout on the U.S. demo of Final Fantasy XII that ships with Dragon Quest VIII next week. They're definitely impressed, saying 'This is not the old-school Final Fantasy action you've come to expect -- but the trade-off is a fast-paced, combat-intensive game with a vast, contiguous world and danger on all sides.'"

53 comments

  1. Re:Nice... by jclast · · Score: 1

    As much as I'd like a FF XII demo, I won't be buying it _because_ it's bundled with the Dragon Quest VII game.

    I played the demo of that one, and it sucked. A lot.

    --
    e2 | LJ
  2. Stopped caring by faloi · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I haven't worried about Final Fantasy in a while. I played FFX, and got tired and bore of the whole thing. A long gaming experience shouldn't be that way because one has to walk mindlessly through the one path available for number of hours. FFXI was better in terms of a game experience, but then it has to be because it's a MMORPG. If FFXII is going to be the worst of both worlds, I don't need it. Without more information, I just don't care.

    It's probably great if that's the kind of game you like to play, but I like the illusion of having some choices on how to proceed in a game.

    --
    "It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education." -Albert Einstein
    1. Re:Stopped caring by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I like the illusion of having some choices on how to proceed in a game.

      Exactly! Morrowind rocked my world once I got used to it, since there were SO MANY choices, and I'm dying to get its sequel, but I could not stand FFVII or FFX for just the reason you explained. FFI at least seemed interesting enough to want to explore, Dragon Warrior I would let me roam almost the whole map from the beginning of the game, but FFVII and since feel like I'm having my hand held, and the only real danger in the game comes in the form of boss battles, and not even all of those are very difficult. And cut-scenes galore keep interrupting my fun as if the developers are telling me "No! Stop imagining on your own! THIS is what you are supposed to get out of this game! There is only one story here, and you may only get out of this game what we give you."

    2. Re:Stopped caring by jchenx · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Wow, Morrowind's openness is exactly why I DIDN'T like the game, and prefer "hold my hand" traditional RPGs (FF-series, Xenosaga, etc.). Those games are supposed to wrap you up in the story so much that you want to see what's next. The choices that you ARE allowed to make are generally restricted to how you want to develop your characters' skills. Granted, if the plot doesn't intrigue you in the first place, then yeah, I definately see it becoming a chore.

      With Morrowind, I felt like I was given no direction at all. Not that its a bad design or anything, since obviously a lot of people prefer that type of game.

      --
      -- jchenx
    3. Re:Stopped caring by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      I take issue with your terminology, traditional RPGs are either pen & paper or the early computer RPGs, all of which are much more freeform than the average japanese RPG. There's nothing traditional about single-pathed movie-driven RPGs.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    4. Re:Stopped caring by Reapy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A lot of gamers are very specific in what they like. My wallot is cursed by my enjoyment of them all.

      I loved all the elder scrolls games for their openness and ability to do what you wanted. I actually never followed the main plot in any of those games but clocked many hours to them.

      I also loved final fantasy for its ability to tell me a great story and presnet it very cinimatically for me. In the newer ff's, the cut scenes were a great reward for me when i finally go to one, as I have always enjoyed squares ability to render a good movie.

      The are both two different games, and no one is forcing either of you to buy or read about the other. But nobody is stopping you from sharing your opinions either :) Share on :)

    5. Re:Stopped caring by jchenx · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I should have said "traditional Japanese" RPGs. Traditional RPGs (like D&D) are arguably the MOST free-form RPG there is.

      Although it's interesting that computer RPGs based on D&D or similar mechanisms, I find, fall somewhere in the middle between Japanese RPGs and the complete openness that was Morrowind. I'm referring to games like Baldur's Gate, Planescape:Tormet, and KOTOR. There's still this storyline that you are forced to follow, but there were different ways of fulfilling it. (For example, you could play good OR evil, and there were often multiple endings. In the FF titles, you had no choice. You were always good, and often only one ending)

      Hmm ... maybe I should give the next Elder Scrolls game another chance. Maybe it's not as "completely open" as I thought it was.

      --
      -- jchenx
    6. Re:Stopped caring by joystickgenie · · Score: 1

      Why is it that every time there is a final fantasy game coming out people complain about the fact that there is only a single plot. The single plot lines and numerous cut scenes where the user just watched and learned about a character and partially limited worlds have always been part of Final Fantasy. Final Fantasy games have always been interactive stories more then create your own adventure. Final Fantasy games are more like reading a fantasy book. You are there to experience the story that the creator put out for you, not to create your own.

      Personally I like interactive stories like Final Fantasy. The creators are telling you a story and you control the action of one or a few of the characters. Having even partial control over the characters lets you become more engrossed into the character and care about them. This can let you have a higher emotional investment into the plot. The game is based on the story. The creators don't give you control over the major plot lines because if they did, then they wouldn't be telling you a story any more.

      There is room to have both RPGs where the user plays a character how he wants it and has complete control over the progress of the game and RPGs where the user is given a story to follow. If you don't like story based games that have a single plot line, don't play Final Fantasy and stop complaining about it.

  3. androgynously delicious by xenomouse · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is it just me or are the main characters in each new FF slowing morphing into a single gender?
    (maybe with exception to FFIX, which had a conquistador and a rastafarian it it)

    1. Re:androgynously delicious by Big+Sean+O · · Score: 4, Funny

      About a year back, I brought home a copy of Final Fantasy X (my first excursion into the FF series) and described the box to my wife as "the one with Meg Ryan on the cover".

      --
      My father is a blogger.
    2. Re:androgynously delicious by Now.Imperfect · · Score: 0

      " Is it just me or are the main characters [rapidgaming.com] in each new FF slowing morphing into a single gender?

      Is it just me or are they running out of character poses?

    3. Re:androgynously delicious by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Sad but true: I had a classmate who looks like Tidus. And another one with an uncanny resemblance to the Toxic Avenger...

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    4. Re:androgynously delicious by chickenmonger · · Score: 1

      Haha! Reminds me of the The Videogame Lookalikes page. (Coralized Link)

  4. Re:Nice... by Yocto+Yotta · · Score: 1

    Yeah, from what I played in the pre-order freebie demo, Dragon Quest VIII's voice-over work sounds abysmal, as far as the "acting" goes. Then again, the over-the-top cartoonish acting somewhat matches the purty (IMO) cartoonish artwork, and totally boring by-the-book save the princess storyline. I've never played a Dragon Quest game before, but it's my understanding they are no Xenogears.

    I guess I'll see when I receive my FFXII demo. Err, uh, I mean, umm, Dragon Quest VIII.

    --
    A B A C A B B
  5. MMORPG-ishness by Spleener12 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The resemblence of the system to an MMORPG is entirely coincidental- MMORPGs happen to have real-time battles on the same screens that the players explore, that's all.

    Remember, the whole reason why RPGs had battle transitions in the first place is because the technology wasn't there for them to make the battles look as pretty as they wanted to on the same screens that the players explored (imagine FF1 if the battles took place on the map screens. Now imagine FF1 if you walked on the map with the same character sprites you had in combat. Get the idea?) It's an abstraction that we don't need anymore, so they got rid of it, since keeping tradition for the sake of tradition is just retarded.

    1. Re:MMORPG-ishness by jeblucas · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There's a point at which "tradition" becomes branding. Everyone that's played a Final Fantasy game knows there's battle transitions. It was for technical reasons before, no it's for branding. If there wasn't this transition, we'd start to compare Final Fantasy to a zillion other games that let you walk around and collect crap and attack wee beasties...and it might come up short. Final Fantasy's characters and stories have been all over the place, so there's no brand continuity there--all they have is the name, some consistant lingo (gil, etc), and certain play characteristics--like battle transitions.

      --
      blarg.
    2. Re:MMORPG-ishness by bateleur · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Branding might be the reason for battle transitions, but it definitely isn't this which stops FF being compared to things. ...because FF does get compared to things constantly. The series is the benchmark against which PS2 RPGs are judged. Many of the individual games in the series are flawed in various ways, but still nothing else really comes close. Love it or hate it, FF almost defines a genre of its own.

    3. Re:MMORPG-ishness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "the whole reason why RPGs had battle transitions in the first place is because the technology wasn't there for them to make the battles look as pretty as they wanted to on the same screens that the players explored"

      Didn't play Chrono Trigger, did you?

      Those battles were far more pretty than any sprite-based FF.

      As usual, the real reason why the battles transitioned to a new screen was becasue the people making the games didnt want to fuck with a successful gaming forumula. They couldnt risk losing *money* on doing something different when the current system worked just fine.

      Remember, games are a business, not an art. They're not working to make the best game possible, they're working to make the worst game you will still buy.

    4. Re:MMORPG-ishness by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Chrono Trigger wasn't exactly a NES game. After the NES there was no technical reason to keep the transitions but they did because it was part of what defined the gameplay.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    5. Re:MMORPG-ishness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Definitely. That's why The Legend of Zelda had transitions to battles.

  6. No PC demo? by antdude · · Score: 0

    Console only?

    --
    Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    1. Re:No PC demo? by PhoenixFlare · · Score: 1

      Console only?

      Yes. RTFA.

    2. Re:No PC demo? by Kazzahdrane · · Score: 1

      You mean like every Final Fantasy game since IX, excluding the online game (which I refuse to give it's numbered name, Square really screwed up that naming system there.

    3. Re:No PC demo? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're a moron.

    4. Re:No PC demo? by Kazzahdrane · · Score: 1

      Well, your grammar and spelling were correct, I'll give you that.

  7. Stupid Blurb by Rocketship+Underpant · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What the heck is a "massive blowout"? Did 1UP explode? Argh ... let's use words with meaning, Slashdot editors.

    --
    He who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.
    1. Re:Stupid Blurb by mink · · Score: 1

      The only /. related visual I can associate with that phrase involves a mix of goatse and tubgirl. I will say no more.

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
    2. Re:Stupid Blurb by Zediker · · Score: 0

      I looked up what tubgirl was.... oh god, my eyes... I think I'm starting to go blind...

      --
      I love to slaughter the english language.
    3. Re:Stupid Blurb by mink · · Score: 1

      That was not my intent. One should never go looking for anything mentioned in relation to goatse.

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
  8. Why by Brantano · · Score: 0

    Why is everything starting to go to quick, action based, gameplay? When i play an RPG, i want to be able to sit down, have fun, relax, and follow the storyline while (slowly) leveling up my characters.

    "No question about it, Final Fantasy XII is radically different from its predecessors. The days of random battles, isolated "drama stage"-style combat arenas and lining up politely to take swings at bad guys are gone. This is not the old-school Final Fantasy action you've come to expect -- but the trade-off is a fast-paced, combat-intensive game with a vast, contiguous world and danger on all sides."

    This is suposed to be Final Fantasy, one of the oldest, most loved rpg's in america, why exactly does it need to change so its more like other rpg's where you can see your enemies? I lived for random battles, random battles MAKE a final fantasy RPG.

    "Battles now take place on the main exploration screen. You can see enemies from an impressive distance; when you're far away, they wander around on their own paths, doing their own thing, even getting into skirmishes with one another. There's no transition to combat, no change in music or scene as you engage the foe. Enemies can sneak up on you from behind, and likewise, you can get the jump on foes by initiating combat before they see you."

    So now there stripping something else that Final Fantasy is known for? No random battles and now we dont even get a catchy little battle tune to initate combat? What the hell were they thinking?

    "Oh, and all your party members are visible at all times; you only have direct control over the party leader. The others are computer controlled. You can, however, change your party leader on the fly by pressing Up on the D-pad and toggling through your active characters. (If you prefer, you can turn off Gambit Mode to prevent your team members from auto-attacking, allowing you to control their actions.)"

    Well now it seems like they stripped the RPG element out of the game, no longer are we playing a role, but were controlling an entire team. Are we god now?

    It looks like they took a mediocure MMO (FFXI), a mediocure strategy game (tactics) and ripped off a little bit of Chrono Cross and KOTOR and mixed them together to make a hopefully (atleast) mediocure RPG. They really need to stop trying to change the mechanics of the game each time around and try to worry about the storyline a little bit more. It seems sad, but i think the last good Final Fantasy was on the original Playstation.

    1. Re:Why by todd10k · · Score: 1

      You aint played the game, yet you seem to have already judged it. You cant judge a game you have not even seen. at least wait till you see, play and experience the new game before decrying it. As for myself, the memory of final fantasy 7 and 8 (i liked those the most(no, this is not an invitation to berate me for my choice. i have my reasons. no. i dont want to know what yours is. everyones already read the "which ff is your favourite" reply's on slashdot) still resonates in my mind, and i believe that this new flow of gameplay may indeed serve to catapult the game to new heights. but, like anything, we must all wait and see.

    2. Re:Why by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      I welcome the change. I have played only three FF games and I'm already tired of the repetitive formula. These days the bar for what qualifies as good combat is miles higher than it was back when FF first appeared. They've been changing the levelling system like mad to prevent the formula from becoming even more stale but at some point (eleven main games into the franchise sounds like a good point, even Capcom changed the Megaman formula quicker than that) the basic gameplay concepts need to see some changes. Since the story on japanese RPGs tends to be pretty samey overall and the number of worthwile variations on the same old "guy meets shy girl, fights villain, world gets destroyed, hero defeats villain and all is good" story that aren't done is rapidly shrinking there needs to be some focus on the other parts of the game.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    3. Re:Why by WaterBreath · · Score: 1
      Since the story on japanese RPGs tends to be pretty samey overall and the number of worthwile variations on the same old "guy meets shy girl, fights villain, world gets destroyed, hero defeats villain and all is good" story that aren't done is rapidly shrinking there needs to be some focus on the other parts of the game.

      Or they could come up with a more original storyline format. If they keep focusing on gameplay, pretty soon you might find you're no longer playing an RPG. I don't play RPGs for the gameplay, but rather the story. I don't care about the gameplay as long as it doesn't get in the way.

      Let's also keep in mind that although the general story arch of most RPGs is fairly generic, it has been the reliable basis of countless successful stories for a very long time. There's much that can be done within that context. The overarching storyline is just a framework within which to do the really interesting stuff, like character development. The central themes of FF7, FF8, FFX (and from what I can see so far FFX-2) are about the person first and foremost. The quest is just a vehicle.

      Anyway, I welcome the changes as well, but only if they make it easier to become immersed in the world of the game, to become one with the story and the characters. Random encounters and level-grinding definitely served to jolt me out of that in previous Final Fantasy games. Though they have been better about that lately. Unfortunately, the travesty of poorly-designed mini-games seems to be expanding. And those are waaaaay more annoying to me than random battles. I'm playing an RPG. Requiring strategy is one thing, because strategy can be integrated with story. But if I can't access a part of the story because my twitch reflexes aren't honed enough, the game designers need to sit and think about the priorities of the genre.

    4. Re:Why by Brantano · · Score: 0

      I have seen the game, while it looks beautifull, the game looks really stale and seems to think it can use the fighting system of a MMO in a console rpg. Have you seen the game at all? If you decide to use the 'non action' battle system, the game actually pauses while it waits for you to select an action. Not only this, but you only control one person at a time. Meaning that while you move around, your other characters move about and attack on there own. -I- want to be able to control all of my characters, level them and use them as i see fit. I dont want a computer to make a decision for me.

      Is it just me or does the main character look like a deformed human chipmunk? Worst character design EVER. Gladly, everyone else seems to actually look normal.

    5. Re:Why by Daetrin · · Score: 1

      The bits you quote make it sound like it's going to be more like a Tales game or a Star Ocean game than an FF game =/ Not that those are bad, but i'd really like to play another _FF_ game.

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    6. Re:Why by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      I don't play RPGs for the gameplay, but rather the story. I don't care about the gameplay as long as it doesn't get in the way.

      In the case of Final Fantasy it got in the way quite often.

      Regarding minigames, I onsider that one of the parts where Final Fantasy could learn from Anachronox:
      "Oh dear, looks like you failed that minigame! Want to try again?"
      [Yes]
      [No]
      [Can't we pretend I made it?]

      Another part is handling the levelling of party members that aren't in the active party (I'd prefer if you could have all characters in play all the time), in Final Fantasy useless characters tend to be ignored and become more and more useless with each battle.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    7. Re:Why by WaterBreath · · Score: 1
      Regarding the minigames, I always thought FF games have been fairly good about not requiring you to "win" the minigames. The only thing you generally miss out on is a special item, and usually it's not something "ultimate", just something that would give you an edge for a little while. (Some glaring exceptions include the "avoid the lightning bolts" minigame, and Blitzball, in FFX, which were both difficult and tedious, and were the only way to obtain certain characters' ultimate weapons.

      Regarding levelling of non-active party members... I actually prefer that they don't do that. I think the appropriate solution is to make sure that every character is balanced and interesting enough that you want to cycle them into the party. Chrono Trigger did this respectably, IMHO. And I thought FF X did this spectacularly well. It was also really cool that, after keeping the skill trees separate for most of the game, if you gained enough levels you could eventually start to transcend that limit, and really round people out. For example, you could take Lulu, a powerful magic user, put her on Auron's skill tree, and with a little patience turn her into a super-powerful wizard/tank.

      An great example of an utter failure at this is Chrono Cross. All of your characters levelled regardless who was in the party and who wasn't. But there were 45 characters, and at least half of them were largely useless once you got out of the scenario where you didn't have access to anyone else, because even with the free levelling, they were distinctly underpowered. 90% of my time with that game was spent with maybe 8 of the 40 characters I collected. One of them (Sprigg) I literally never put into my party after the end of the scenario where I couldn't remove him.

      But on the bright side, there were really no minigames at all in Chrono Cross.

    8. Re:Why by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      I dunno, minigames aren't a problem for me but too many are never good. The problem is that by adding more gameplay styles you need a player who enjoys all of them to enjoy the entire game. That's what I dislike especially about Treasure, they tend to throw in so many gameplay styles that maybe three people in the world will appreciate them all. Or take Battletoads for another example.

      I still prefer levelling all characters. Sure, they have to be balanced but if there are one or two characters that I want to keep in the party all the time (usually the medic and the main damage dealer (who happens to be the plot's lead character often enough)) those tend to become way too powerful. Even worse if only those characters are strong enough to deal with all the enemies you encounter if you don't spend time levelgrinding.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
  9. From a Dragon Quest fan by PKFC · · Score: 1

    This is really scary... Five pages about a "30 minute" demo? I suppose we haven't seen FFXII in a long time so people might need reminding... The DQVIII demo was hours long...

    I'm still more concerned about Dragon Quest VIII though. FFXII was a good play according to a DQer at E3 2004 so I don't think the demo will be abysmal. DQVIII, however, adds mismatched voices, poor button layouts (try using L1 and L2 as yes and no and then go to the menu where L1 becomes page left) and *shivers* the menu... Bundling the game with the FFXII demo is a good idea for sales, but combined with the localization itself, seems like SE has their own idea of what Dragon Quest is. It's almost as if they are forcing it to sell by changing what was good about it before (spell names, sound effects). Remains to be seen this month though and I still can't wait.

    And for those of you interested in DQVIII, you should take a look at slimeknights.com. Square Enix IS pushing the game like never before. (Ok so they aren't arranging with Sony to give out copies in OPM, but all sorts of merchandise [just not Japanese merchandise] and a big community of fans there)

    [FriNov11:10:51:59] !dq8
    [FriNov11:10:52:00] DragonQuest 8 will be released in the US in 3days 21hrs 9mins 19secs

    1. Re:From a Dragon Quest fan by jclast · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why do these HTML articles have more than one page anyway? We're not reading a magazine with physical pages.

      --
      e2 | LJ
    2. Re:From a Dragon Quest fan by Greg_D · · Score: 1

      Because they can load a new set of ads for every page you read.

    3. Re:From a Dragon Quest fan by jchenx · · Score: 1

      1. More pages = more ads.
      2. More pages, smaller weight per page (easier to load ... if an article were 50 pages, I would prefer it to be split up)

      Most likely, it's #1 though. :)

      --
      -- jchenx
  10. Promising by Snowspinner · · Score: 1

    As someone who's been lukewarm on the Final Fantasy series, this may be the game that gets me to believe that maybe the beatings will stop. Honestly, a lot of this sounds like the influence of Enix over the company - the loss of random encounters, a faster-paced battle system, and a system based on player timing are all traits more associated with Enix games. Which I've mostly though superior to Square games over the years, so this works well from my perspective.

    1. Re:Promising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One would hope Enix's influence would be felt, Squaresoft was bought out by Enix after that absolutely abysmal failure of Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within.

      Squaresoft doesn't exist any more. Square-Enix is simply Enix's rebranding themself after aquiring Squaresoft.

      Unfortunately, much of the Squaresoft taint has been appearing in Enix games. If Dragon Quest VIII fails, it's almost certainly because of Squaresoft's influence.

      Some of the best RPGs I've ever played were Enix titles, there really were no good Squaresoft titles I can think of. Popular Squaresoft titles, yes. But none of them have ever been any good.

    2. Re:Promising by mink · · Score: 1

      They made a pretty good shooter called Internal Section for the PSX. Also some fun sports games. Sadly most of the non RPG stuff never made it out in the USA.

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
  11. Forget Square, gimme Enix! by Stormwatch · · Score: 1

    I don't care much about Final Fantasy, so I hope Square/Enix will do something with their better (IMO) but less known property, the Soul Blazer trilogy - Soul Blazer, Illusion of Gaia, and Terranigma. A visually improved re-release would be great.

    1. Re:Forget Square, gimme Enix! by fleck_99_99 · · Score: 1

      I was also always under the impression that Soul Blazer was a sorta-sequel to Act Raiser. (Yes, I know there was also an Act Raiser 2.)

      --
      seven two six five
      seven four six one seven
      two six four two e
    2. Re:Forget Square, gimme Enix! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those games were all developed by Quintet (they were only published by Enix), who haven't made a game since 1997. As much as I enjoyed their games and would like to see a revival, it doesn't appear likely at this point.

    3. Re:Forget Square, gimme Enix! by Stormwatch · · Score: 1
      Quintet [...] haven't made a game since 1997

      /me checks

      Actually they did Code R (Sat, 98), Planet Laika (PS, 99), and Godzilla Generations Maximum Impact (DC, 00). By the way, check out a nice Soul Blazer trilogy fan site.

  12. hahaha by Joe+the+Lesser · · Score: 3, Informative

    "In fact, all the skills featured in the demo should be familiar to FF veterans. The one exception is the summon Hasmal's groaningly named skill Roxxor, about which the less said the better."

    That's priceless.

    --
    "I only speak the truth"
    Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
  13. Hasmal is l33t. by game+kid · · Score: 1
    The one exception is the summon Hasmal's groaningly named skill Roxxor, about which the less said the better.

    ZOMG H45ma1 15 t3h |_337!!1 H3 PWn2 t3H 3n3N\y n00bz w1t t3h r0xx0r!! w00t!1!eleventyone--what? They're saying it's not good? t3h SUX!!

    --
    You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
    1. Re:Hasmal is l33t. by Firbi · · Score: 1

      I actually read/understood all that and now my head hurts =(