Slashdot Mirror


Final Fantasy XIII Still PS3 Only

Square Enix recently announced some of the games to be showcased at their "private party" in August. Looking at the games listed we see that Final Fantasy XIII seems to still be PS3 only and the rumors that Final Fantasy Agito XIII was canned seem to be highly overrated.

124 comments

  1. uh.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    When wasn't it expected to be PS3 only?

    1. Re:uh.. by shawn(at)fsu · · Score: 1

      Maybe it's like an article stating that "Elvis is still dead"
      Just in case someone forgot.

      Or for when the zombies come.

      --
      500 dollar reward for tip(s) leading to the arrest of the person(s) who stole my sig.
    2. Re:uh.. by sexconker · · Score: 0, Troll

      XBots want the 360 to do better.

      XBots point to the shitty sales of the PS3, and argue that big titles should be multi-platform.

      XBots think that FFXIII on the 360 could help the 360 in Japan.

      XBots start their own rumors, and begin to believe them.

      Sony Defense Force member sees this piece of "news" and shouts it from the mountain tops of slashdot, to quash those rumors.

    3. Re:uh.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh. How cute. You refer to the Xbox community members as X-Bots. You are new and exciting. Go fuck yourself, troll.

    4. Re:uh.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gosh you're such a valued member of the community, makes me proud to be a gamer it sure does.

    5. Re:uh.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      When the PS3 was absolutely tanking and the Xbox 360 was dominant, Square Enix announced that they were considering porting FFXIII to the Xbox 360.

      Later, Square Enix announced that they've licensed the Unreal 3 engine.

      So there was a lot of speculation that they were planning on bringing FFXIII out on the Xbox 360.

      Since then, the PS3 has moved from absolutely pathetic to just plain luke-warm, and the Xbox 360 has completely failed in Japan. So it makes less sense now then it did some two freaking years ago when they first started leaking screenshots.

    6. Re:uh.. by moderatorrater · · Score: 1

      Microsoft should be offering them millions if not billions of dollars to make it an xbox exclusive. Japan is one of the largest gaming markets in the world, and FF games get huge lines and are real console movers. I would expect the PS3 to make a huge jump after this is released in the US and Europe alone.

      However, if it were an XBox exclusive, even for just a year, they would be able to mount a serious attack in japan and move consoles in one of the biggest video game markets in the world.

    7. Re:uh.. by CastrTroy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Sadly, I don't think that even Final Fantasy could make the Japanese want to buy an XBox. It would just alienate the fans. Considering the popularity of the systems, and the fact that FF doesn't require amazing graphics, I'm surprised they don't put it out on the Wii.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    8. Re:uh.. by atari2600 · · Score: 1

      Guess I pissed off an xbot.

    9. Re:uh.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Or maybe you're just an idiot.

    10. Re:uh.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nothing says greasy-haired, zit-faced, fat-ass loser quite like console fanboyism.

    11. Re:uh.. by NothingMore · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Outside of quality control issues for the console itself (the RROD) i dont really understand how you could call it the xbotch 360. The controller the 360 comes with is arguably one of the best controllers ever made and there is a very large amount of quality games on the console.

    12. Re:uh.. by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Eh, the controller is OK. It's adequate, I wouldn't call it special. Now the GameCube controller, that was damn near perfection. Never before had I held a controller that fit my hands as if it were custom-made for them. Damn, that was controller nirvana.

      --
      "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
    13. Re:uh.. by lucas+teh+geek · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Now the GameCube controller, that was damn near perfection. Never before had I held a controller that fit my hands as if it were custom-made for them. you have got to be joking! that controller felt like it moulded for the hands of someone who'd been in a nasty accident that had broken every bone in their hands and had them mend in the wrong places... say, you weren't in a nasty hand-deforming accident by any chance?
      --
      TIAEAE!
    14. Re:uh.. by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      the fact that FF doesn't require amazing graphics

      Huh? To me it looks like the graphics are the biggest selling point of recent FFs.

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

      Or maybe YOU'RE just an idiot.

    16. Re:uh.. by ProppaT · · Score: 1

      Say what you want, I agree with the guy above you. The only complaint I had with the Gamecube controller was that the d-pad was too small. The positive thing is it was a true d-pad.

      IMO, the major problem with all the current gen systems are the d-pad. The 360's d-pad is gummy and inaccurate for fighters. The PS3 has Sony's bastardized "4 button" d-pad. The Wii has a good d-pad, it's just too small. Will these companies ever realize that 2d and d-pads aren't dead? As long as there's fighting games coming out, we'll need good d-pads...and with huge fighters such as Street Fighter IV just around the corner, I'm going to have to buy new controllers with good d-pads or shell out big $$$ for joysticks just to play these with. And really, when I've got 4 generations of consoles, each with specialized controllers/joysticks/etc in my closet, I don't have room for any more crap. That goes for you too, stupid music games with giant drum kits.

      --
      Wise men say, "Forgiveness is divine, but never pay full price for late pizza."
    17. Re:uh.. by The+Aethereal · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm not sure if it is the biggest selling point, but Final Fantasy games always have above average, if not almost revolutionary graphics at their release.

    18. Re:uh.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The controller? God no. It has the worst D-pad I've ever had the displeasure of using.

    19. Re:uh.. by master_kaos · · Score: 1

      No, I definitely think it is you.

    20. Re:uh.. by spidercoz · · Score: 1

      that's why I read these boards, the intelligent and witty discourse.....

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - Evelyn Beatrice Hall, re Voltaire
    21. Re:uh.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or maybe I'M just an idiot.

    22. Re:uh.. by ShadowsHawk · · Score: 1

      I love the GC controller. Perfect size and button layout. I would have liked the Z button to be a big bigger, but it's not a big issue for me. Having said that; every time I try to use a PS2 controller for more than an hour, my hands start to go numb.

    23. Re:uh.. by 7Prime · · Score: 1

      Not sure I agree. FF6, FF8 & FF9 definitely were ahead of their time, graphically. Some would argue that FFX was, though in many ways, it's more just a lighting and voice update to where FF8 was. But FF4, FF5, FF7, and FF12 were merely average graphics for their times. Granted, they made better usage of their graphics than most games. FF7 also pioneered 3D RPGs, however the result was pretty low quality compared to most other 3D games of its time. FF4 should hardly count, since most of its development was aimed at the NES and was only switched over to 16-bit about halfway through its development. But recently, FF12 was pretty piss poor considering the other things that came out around that time. FF13 looks pretty nice, but it doesn't seem all that much above Lost Odyssey which came out early this year on the 360.

      --
      Multiplayer Gaming (defined): Sitting around, discussing single-player games with my friends, at the bar.
    24. Re:uh.. by atari2600 · · Score: 1

      That's a big outside genius.

    25. Re:uh.. by Sunz · · Score: 1

      Very bad news. I am the owner of xbox 360

    26. Re:uh.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      idiot.

    27. Re:uh.. by ScreamingCactus · · Score: 1

      xbox controller versus ps3 controller... basically the same, except ps3 controller has sixaxis and weighs about the same as the 360 controller would on the moon. Oh and the battery on the ps3 ctrlr lasts at least 3x as long. (I own both, but almost never play the xbox). Let's face it, PS3 is way better, that's why it costs more. I just hate downloading those damn updates!

      --
      The path to enlightenment is truly through homemade drugs!
    28. Re:uh.. by aeoo · · Score: 1

      the PS3 has moved from absolutely pathetic to just plain luke-warm, and the Xbox 360 has completely failed in Japan From where I stand, PS3 has moved from like-warm to boiling hot. I've had xbox360 (actually 2, since I didn't bother replacing the first one that failed) for about a year now. I'm sad to report there is a grand-total of one, count-em, JUST ONE GAME, that I have honest-to-god enjoyed: Rainbow Six Vegas 1. And then there were were a few OK games, like Halo (ho-hum), The Darkness (decent), Mass Effect (underwhelming, but still entertaining), and Oblivion IV (great game ruined by the shitty console, as I experience hangs in it, frame rate drops, and so on, but love the concept of the game). And then there is hyped crap like Gears of War -- I could only stomach 30 mins of that mindless grinding -- the worst FPS ever, no plot, crap weapons, horrible characters (too fat looking, horrible voices), with the only good thing being a decent, but not the best, control scheme (the best FPS control is Rainbow Six Vegas, by far).

      Now compare this to PS3. No hangs, no RROD issues, it runs very very cool (compared to scorching hot xbox360), power supply is inside the box compared to a fugly humangous power supply brick that comes with xbox360, plays blu-ray movies.

      And now games -- I got these together with PS3:

      MGS 4
      GTA 4
      Ratchet and Clank (Future...)
      COD 4
      Rainbow Six Vegas 2
      Ninja Gaiden Sigma

      Now, many of these are available on xbox360 too, but PS3 is superior hardware, it runs cool and doesn't crash as much, why in the heck would I want to run any of these games on an xbox? MGS 4 is exclusive to PS3 and unlike xbox exclusives, it's a great game. I still want to by Dynasty Warriors 6 and a few other games. I'm looking forward to FF 13 and I loved FF 23 on PS2, while Lost Story is merely OH-KEY on xbox360, and what turn-based strategy games are there on xbox360? Slim to none is the answer. On PS3 also not so many, but there is a huge amount of them on PS2, and I am willing to bet they are going to be coming to PS3 and not to xbox360 and not to wii either.

      Wii has 2 games I want to play -- Zelda and No More Heroes. I dislike the mario games and Pokemon can be played on DS, which I do have. Etc.

      So PS3 is looking great from my point of view, and xbox360 was a huge disappointment in terms of its game library and hardware. xbox360 had plenty of time to get good games and it failed to do so. Also almost every game on xbox360 is available on PS3 too, and PS3 hardware is supreme. PS3 exclusives are way better than xbox360 exclusives for my taste.

      There you go. I think PS3 is going to rock.
  2. Hate to sound like a fanboy, but... by Eponymous+Crowbar · · Score: 0

    For me to care less, they'd have to announce that Electronic Arts was producing the next FF installment, with a guest appearance by Hello, Kitty.... actually, even that might improve the game somehow...

  3. FF by Speare · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Final Fantasy has always been focused on one platform. They push the hell out of every polygon budget, every memory limit, that they can get out of the hardware. Even if the core libraries are easily portable, I can imagine they don't relish the thought of porting or dual-targeting the title, because the game will not look as good on one of the platforms. For a title that is all about visuals, that's hard to take.

    --
    [ .sig file not found ]
    1. Re:FF by Gabest · · Score: 1

      Final Fantasies on the ps2 are technically among the simplier games. They just don't abuse the hardware as most big titles do. Polygon count is also very low.

    2. Re:FF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since when is Final Fantasy all about visuals? Oh right. When it turned to crap.

    3. Re:FF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ahhhh what???? FF if anything has always NOT pushed the platforms capabilities, there graphics are farely conservative and if anything they should be setup for easy ports, even the Wii could handle the graphics levels most FF releases aim for.

    4. Re:FF by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      That's because the previous FFs were not made for consoles more powerful than the Wii (PS2 if you only count the numbered ones) and the Wii is the most powerful out of the ones they did make FFs for so far, no wonder it's not being pushed past its limit.

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

      Or right about the time it became too popular for you to like?

    6. Re:FF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Huh?

      FF XII - Playstation 2
      FF XII: Revenant Wings - Nintendo DS

      FF VII - Playstation
      FF VII: Dirge of Cerberus - Playstation 2
      FF VII: Crisis Core - PSP

      This is not the "one platform" you are looking for.

    7. Re:FF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      See how it is a different game for each system? I think what the origional poster was arguing was that they never release a game on more than one system.

  4. Utter bullshit. by SilentBob0727 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The Final Fantasy series is a console mover.

    FFI came out for the NES in 1990. I loved it so much I had to beg my parents to buy me a SNES for FFII/IV.
    Then FFVII came out for the Playstation. Fortunately, it did so well that they ported it to the PC. Then FFVIII tanked on the PC and FFIX released only on the playstation, so I went out and bought one, allowing me to scoop up Anthology, Chronicles, and Origins in the crossfire.

    Then FFX came out for the PS2. I loved FFVII and FFIX so much I had to buy myself a PS2 to play FFX.

    Then the original FFII and FFIII came out on the WonderSwan Color. In Japan only.

    Then the original FFIII came out for the Nintendo DS. Guess who went out and bought one.

    Unfortunately for Square-Enix, I did not love FFXII so much that I will be buying a PS3 to play FFXIII. The spell is finally broken. Or I'm getting older.

    --
    Life would be easier if I had the source code.
    1. Re:Utter bullshit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      More bad news for you, then, Sony have also announced that "Get Off My Lawn 2: The Reckoning" will be a playstation3 exclusive as well.

    2. Re:Utter bullshit. by Darkness404 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Somehow I think that FFXIII will be PS3 only.... Then a FFXIII: Wii Edition will be released on the Wii, and lastly a FFXIII DX version will be released on the 360. Its only a matter of time, though I think a port to the Wii would be more likely then the 360 (with SE seeing FFCC:MLaaK a $15 downloadable game is selling extremely fast...)

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    3. Re:Utter bullshit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah, 12 was boring. The combat and gameplay are too much like FFXI and not enough like traditional Final Fantasy games, the game is full of fetch quests, more than enough of which are mandatory but don't really move the plot forward, and there's yet another painful upgrade system.

    4. Re:Utter bullshit. by Katmando911 · · Score: 1

      FYI they also released the original Final Fantasy II along with Final Fantasy I as part of "Dawn of Souls" for Gameboy advance

    5. Re:Utter bullshit. by Skatox · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately for Square-Enix, I did not love FFXII so much that I will be buying a PS3 to play FFXIII. The spell is finally broken. Or I'm getting older. I felt the same.
    6. Re:Utter bullshit. by SilentBob0727 · · Score: 1

      Yeah... In my frantic attempt to cobble together an accurate list of US Final Fantasy releases, a couple slipped by my otherwise ironclad recall abaility.

      --
      Life would be easier if I had the source code.
    7. Re:Utter bullshit. by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      While I really enjoyed FF 1,5, and chrono trigger, I have to say that I'm not impressed with the recent ones. I actually stopped playing at FF VII, because it was just so damn boring. The game is boring enough in that you have to spend time leveling up to complete your quests. But that's bearable because the quests are fun, and challenging, and make you think, and the story is good too. FF VII was terrible, because they made the fight system so excruciatingly long. 20 to 30 seconds of animation for each attack sequence. It's cool the first 15 times you see it, but gets really boring really fast. Not only that, the game was extremely linear. There wasn't a lot of figuring out stuff on your own. You basically followed the path they set out for you. It was like watching a good movie, with little bits of interactivity thrown in here and there.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    8. Re:Utter bullshit. by Forkenhoppen · · Score: 4, Interesting

      FFXII was set in a world created for the earlier game Final Fantasy Tactics, and the team was lead by the folks behind that game. As far as I know, all previous games have had a completely new world, with the possible exception of FFIX.

      I am a touch concerned, though, as you are, about the upcoming Final Fantasy games. This recent approach by Square-Enix to make the Final Fantasy series into multiple-game affairs spread across everything from portables and cellphones up to the latest cutting-edge home console is causing them to over-think and over-engineer the worlds in which their characters reside. The games, or to be more specific the stories, are losing their focus and suffering for it.

      On the upside, at least they're re-releasing Final Fantasy IV on the DS with updated visuals. (That's FFII from the SNES) It'll be nice to take that trip back in time to when the worlds were self-contained and focused on the premise rather than providing fodder for all the requisite/inevitable spin-offs.

    9. Re:Utter bullshit. by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      I am a touch concerned, though, as you are, about the upcoming Final Fantasy games. This recent approach by Square-Enix to make the Final Fantasy series into multiple-game affairs spread across everything from portables and cellphones up to the latest cutting-edge home console is causing them to over-think and over-engineer the worlds in which their characters reside. The games, or to be more specific the stories, are losing their focus and suffering for it.


      Actually, the only one I can think of that's spawned a ton of spinoffs is Final Fantasy VII. I'm told it's not the best FF out there (FF5/6 apparently are, but I haven't played those), but it was one of the most popular ones - enough so that 10 years later, people still liked that story. After all, for North America, there's a movie (Advent Children), a 3rd person shooter? (Dirge of Cerebrus), and a prequel (Crisis Core, PSP). I know in Japan there are a ton of cellphone games and movies base don it as well. But I don't think 10+ years ago when FF7 was originally released, that people were thinking that far ahead.

      Of course, I haven't played FFXII yet (I have it).

      My only thing is... I've never finished any FF game - I end up in some spot and decide to not continue. For FF7, it was when I got Cloud's ultimate weapon, and couldn't remember my original materia configuration. For FF8, it was near the beginning - I just got bored. For FF9, it was in an open area where I got tired of random battling. Ditto with FFX. I hear that FF12 and later ones have ways of avoiding random battles, as well as knowing when one will happen so you can do it if you wanted. Crisis Core has it, and it works well enough (plus, it avoids a lot of the needless travelling in order to do subquests).
    10. Re:Utter bullshit. by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 1

      I'm told it's not the best FF out there (FF5/6 apparently are, but I haven't played those) In my experience, it breaks down this way: approximately half the FF fans believe FF6 is the best, approximately half believe FF7 is the best. I fall into the latter camp. You really have no cause to believe what you heard about FF7 being the best, since it's pretty evenly split.
      --
      "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
    11. Re:Utter bullshit. by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      15$ plus paid-for addon content. If that makes them money they might shift more resources into developing downloadable games with tons of "horse armor".

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    12. Re:Utter bullshit. by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      I compare FF5 and FF8 (never played 7) this way: In both you'll fight Odin on a time limit. In FF5 it's 1 minute, in FF8 it's 20 minutes (granted, that's including the short dungeon he's in but you can solve it almost fully, leave and return to reset the timer).

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    13. Re:Utter bullshit. by microTodd · · Score: 1

      I'm in the same boat as you...hardcore fan of the old school, the new ones not so much. I think part of it is that Sakaguchi is no longer with Squeenix. If you've got a 360 try picking up his game "Lost Odyssey". It actually feels more like "Final Fantasy" than FF12 did.

      --
      "You cannot find out which view is the right one by science in the ordinary sense." - C.S. Lewis on Intelligent Design
    14. Re:Utter bullshit. by Quattro+Vezina · · Score: 1

      And I'm one of those few oddballs who believes Tactics is the best :D

      --
      I support the Center for Consumer Freedom
    15. Re:Utter bullshit. by Lilith's+Heart-shape · · Score: 1

      They also did remakes of FFI and FFII for the PSP. There's also a remake of FFIII for the DS, and an English translation of FFIV for the DS is in the works.

    16. Re:Utter bullshit. by Steve+Max · · Score: 1

      In my experience, those who played VI before VII think VI is better. Those who played VII before became spoiled by the video sequences and graphics, and couldn't stand playing VI - so they think VII is better.

    17. Re:Utter bullshit. by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 1

      Not necessarily true. I played FF6, and I think it is a great game... just inferior to FF7. Say what you will, but I honestly believe, having played both, that FF6 is the inferior of the two games (and not because the graphics are bad, I can overlook that easily).

      --
      "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
    18. Re:Utter bullshit. by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 1

      I'm playing Tactics on the PSP at the moment, and it is really damn good. Also really damn hard, unfortunately.

      --
      "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
    19. Re:Utter bullshit. by Steve+Max · · Score: 1

      Yes, but which one did you play first? My point is that in general, people prefer one of the two. In 99% of the cases, they prefer VI if they played VI before VII, and VII if they played VII before VI.

    20. Re:Utter bullshit. by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1

      Blue Dragon, I didn't care for. Lost Odyssey, however, is an excellent game. Both include the Japanese language track. And with Star Ocean 4, Infinite Undiscovery and Last Remenant all coming to Xbox 360, it's a great day to be a JRPG fan. Mark my words, we'll see both MGS4 and FFXIII on 360.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    21. Re:Utter bullshit. by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 1

      Fair enough, but you made it sound as though all those who prefer FF7 are graphics whores, and that's why they prefer it (and won't even try FF6). I'm just saying that isn't the case.

      --
      "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
    22. Re:Utter bullshit. by ahsile · · Score: 1

      Amen! Had to get a PSP so I could take the game with me! Although I gave up on the other FF titles a long long time ago.

    23. Re:Utter bullshit. by ahsile · · Score: 1

      There a couple issues with tactics for those who first play it: a) if you don't have a clue how to unlock certain jobs, the AI will outpace you quickly. b) If you don't use random battles to level up (levels and jobs), you're going to be hurting later.

      I believe the first time I played the game I was in the mid-30's by the end. I got hopelessly stuck fighting some dragons near the end... and there was no going back. These days I've played the game to death and have a party fully decked out. The only challenge IS the random battles since they're based on your player level rather than the pre-set story battles.

    24. Re:Utter bullshit. by apoc06 · · Score: 1

      ditto.

      FF tactics gets overlooked due to the fact that it was a turn based strategy game, but the story is generally accepted as much better than most of the core canon titles.

      id love to see a true ps3 sequel to tactics. the GBA one was decent, but the story was lacking and the DS one doesnt look too appealing. square needs to drop a FF story onto a disgaea-like gameplay mechanic and it would sell tons.

    25. Re:Utter bullshit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Personally, I still think FF 3 on the SNES (US number III, not JP number 3) was the best FF.
      It had a decent plot, plenty of gameplay and extras, the 'movies' were informative AND quite interactive.
      Sure, it was 'old-gen' sprite graphics but even now it still looks decent.

      I quit playing FF because of VII or VIII (I can't keep them straight anymore). The reason is simple: When I want to play a game, I don't mind some movie scenes now and then, but I'm trying to play, not watch. If I wanted to sit back hands-off and watch a movie, I'd put on a DVD instead.
      Having to watch a 1/2 hour intro before I can even control anything is annoying, and even more so when I come back from the 'fridge to find that I got killed before a save point was available.

    26. Re:Utter bullshit. by SpottedKuh · · Score: 1

      It's interesting that you call FF a console mover, because I certainly felt the same way. However, perhaps I'm just getting too old as well, because I'm finding that there are a lot of things that are pissing me off about FF games -- especially the newer ones, but the older ones as well, as I replay them.

      • Doing something early in the game can ruin something later in the game. Here, I'm not talking about a choice that you make, where if you choose to do thing A early in the game, you get to do quest X later in the game, but if you chose to do thing B you do quest Y. I'm talking about retarded things. In FF XII, if you open a certain chest very early in the game, you can't get a certain very good weapon later in the game. There is no indication whatsoever not to open this chest. FF XII lost me when I realized I absolutely needed a guidebook to play the game. I never needed a guidebook for FF IV-VI.
      • On a related note, exploring more early in the game is punished later in the game. Sounds stupid? FF I, the very first game: if you level up too much before class change, you get weak little characters in the end. As much as I loved FF VI, it too made this mistake: fighting too much before you get your espers for level-up bonuses has the same effect.
      • Which brings me to the whole idiotic idea of random level ups in a console game. This idea almost encourages me (though I don't care enough) to reset the console if I get a "bad" level-up, then try again. How about fixed level-ups, or points that I can distribute at each level-up as I see fit.

      As far as I'm concerned, these "game design" ideas just punish the gamer, not make the game more fun.

      That said, I really enjoy the FF-style RPG as a genre. Would anyone be able to recommend any good games in that style which don't commit any of the stupid sins listed above (DS or Gameboy Advance are best, Wii or PS3 also good)?

    27. Re:Utter bullshit. by atomicxblue · · Score: 1

      Final Fantasy X and X-2 take place on a different world but in the same universe as FFVII. There is an interesting article by one of the creators (Nomura I think) who says that the Al Bhed flew to Gaia (FFVII planet) and became Aerith's "Ancients".

    28. Re:Utter bullshit. by Das+Modell · · Score: 1

      My preference for FFVII has nothing to do with the graphics. I played Chrono Trigger for the first time in 2000 or 2001 and it's still one of my favorite games.

    29. Re:Utter bullshit. by tmalone · · Score: 1

      I've finished many and left many at the very end. I never finished 2 (IV in Japan) or 5. I stopped playing both at the end because I was done. I was getting ready to go fight the last bad guy and I just couldn't bring myself to care enough to grind my way through some horribly long dungeon, fight the "last bad guy", then have him change forms and fight him again. I hate this convention in RPGs where the final bad dude has to be at the end of a dungeon and has to change forms. Games rarely have good enough plots that I care enough to see them through. I play the games for the interesting worlds, not for the fight system.

      I have also dropped many games because I got tired of fighting random monsters. Some games let you avoid this but few are setup in a way that you can level enough just based on the required fights, so eventually you have to pay your dues and grind.

    30. Re:Utter bullshit. by enderjsv · · Score: 1

      Trust me, the difficulty actually makes it more enjoyable. I played through the tactics sequel on the game boy advance. It was an okay game, but the fact that it was far easier than it's predecessor made me feel as though I was missing out on something.

    31. Re:Utter bullshit. by SilentBob0727 · · Score: 1

      Actually, at the end of X-2 a guy named "Shinra" is talking about discovering vast amounts of energy that could be harnessed for electrical power emanating from the "Farplane", the place where dead things go in that universe.

      In FFVII, "Shinra" is a former munitions manufacturing corporation that controls the world through the sale of Mako, electrical energy drawn from the "Lifestream", the "place" where dead things go in that universe.

      Square-Enix has said that this is intentional.

      I choose to believe that a game that's entirely sidequest-based and where character development is synonymous with dress-up is not Final Fantasy canon. Didn't stop me from finishing it though.

      --
      Life would be easier if I had the source code.
    32. Re:Utter bullshit. by SilentBob0727 · · Score: 1

      I played through XII once and gave it away. I played straight through and didn't do too many sidequests other than some hunts, which was a welcome alternative to grinding. I did max out everyone's lame-ass "license board" and buy decent spells and abilities... *when* I could find them. When I beat the final boss (in whom I had zero emotional investment), I watched through an HOUR of cinematic crap expecting there to be more game before I realized with dismay that the letters on the screen spelled "THE END".

      Aside from all my characters fighting for me the entire damn time (which, since I'm a programmer, I'll admit I found kind of cool), I had a few real other beefs with the battle system. Summoning absolutely BLEW in XII. First you had to GET the summon, then you had to get one of your characters all the way over the license board to activate it, one person and one person only could choose to summon it, and it basically hung around being useless until you gave it something to do. Limit breaks sucked too. The amount of damage you deal is directly proportional to how fast you can identify a button and push it.

      And what's up with making moogles and chocobos all grimy and animal-like? Sure it fits in with the backdrop of the universe, but dammit, these creatures are supposed to be cute and cuddly regardless of the setting. Part of their appeal is that they are intentionally out of place. Give me a teddy bear that deals 9999 HP of damage to Kefka for crying out loud.

      I really admired the game from a technical standpoint, but as a main-series Final Fantasy title, it ranks a solid... 12. Bring me back ATB battles and engaging storylines and give me a freaking Final Fantasy game.

      --
      Life would be easier if I had the source code.
    33. Re:Utter bullshit. by EventHorizon_pc · · Score: 1

      Final Fantasy III and VIII seem to use the same world. Here's more info: http://www.rpgamer.com/editor/2005/q2/050205gm.html

    34. Re:Utter bullshit. by jlechem · · Score: 1

      I had FF IX bit me in the ass on this one. I forgot to buy the super hard core magic spells while in the town. Later on in the game this town gets locked and you can no longer enter it. My mages were pretty much crippled from then on to the end of the game.

      --
      Hold up, wait a minute, let me put some pimpin in it
    35. Re:Utter bullshit. by SpottedKuh · · Score: 1

      I forgot to buy the super hard core magic spells while in the town. Later on in the game this town gets locked and you can no longer enter it. My mages were pretty much crippled from then on to the end of the game.

      Thank you -- another huge mistake committed in some games: things that you cannot go back and do later! The idea that I should catch everything the first time through a dungeon / level / area / etc. is ridiculous. I should be able to go back and complete things that I missed. Perhaps FF VIII and IX were the worst of all the FF games for this issue? Last disc, pretty much everything is locked. Stupid and lazy game design.

  5. Great disturbance in the Force by denzacar · · Score: 5, Funny

    As if millions of voices suddenly cried out "DUH!" and then were silenced.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  6. A sony fanboy... by Skatox · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Take that Xbox 360 fanboys!!!

    1. Re:A sony fanboy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It makes sense really. A 10 disc dvd version for 360 would be rather expensive and cumbersome.

    2. Re:A sony fanboy... by ifrag · · Score: 1
      Eh?
      Dual Layer Blu-Ray : 50GB
      DVD-9 : 8.5GB

      50GB / 8.5GB = 5.88 DVD-9's

      And that's assuming that game actually is Dual Layer in the first place. More likely it's only single layer therefore...

      Single Layer Blu-Ray : 25GB

      25GB / 8.5GB = 2.94 DVD-9's

      So assuming everything being equivalent between the two, codecs and all, it would fit on 3 DVD-9's anyway.

      --
      Fear is the mind killer.
  7. Not that surprising by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Given Square's obsession lately with cutscenes. They seem to love having lots of prerendered cutscenes in the game, rather than using the game engine. Well, that is the one area that a Blu-Ray drive will be advantageous in gaming. While you don't really need the space for game assets, you certainly could if you want to have an hours of HD cutscenes.

    Personally, I'm not a real fan of the whole cutscene thing. I'd rather you use the engine all the time, more immersive to me, and game graphics these days are good enough that it isn't as though you need a cutscene just to express detail the engine can't.

    1. Re:Not that surprising by theaceoffire · · Score: 1

      I have seen a whole lot of people using the "Its all sound", "Its only cut scenes", "They are duplicating all data", etc. Its as if no one can believe that games can be 25GB or larger.

      MGS4 is so large that they will have to remove the Japanese language so that it will all fit on their dual layer 50GB disk.

      Combine that with Final Fantasy's tendency to be one of the largest games released and the bar set by FFXII (Dynamic loading to allow more people on the screen than most PS2 games while reducing load tiems, allowing you to automate your characters to reduce the pain of griding, etc), and I feel that this game will be something amazing.

      They used to use cutscenes to hide load screens and make low graphics look amazing... and they don't have those problems any more. They have much more room for data, a hard drive to cache heavily used data, and a very *very* powerful super computer to run the game.

      --
      I steal signatures. This one used to be yours.
    2. Re:Not that surprising by Thugthrasher · · Score: 1

      Using MGS4 as an example of a game that is huge for a reason other than cutscenes is NOT a good idea.
      This is the game that has MULTIPLE (that's right MORE THAN ONE) cutscene OVER 90 MINUTES.

      That means that even if there were only 2 and they were the only cutscenes in the game, you'd be looking at over 3 hours of video.

      This means MGS4 has a LOT of space out of that 50GB dedicated to cutscenes.

    3. Re:Not that surprising by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      This is why I'm happy I went with the Wii. I do not have 90 minutes to invest in a cutscene for a game. I want to play games. I don't want to sit around watching movies. If I wanted to watch a movie, I'd watch a movie. We used to joke around and wish that our Nintendo had a skip-the-shit button, so you didn't have to sit through all the junk those games had. Little did we know how bad games would get.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    4. Re:Not that surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Based on what I heard about Smash Brothers for the Wii, I don't think N is doing any better in that area.

    5. Re:Not that surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The cutscenes in the Subspace Emissary were all skippable the last time I played through it.

    6. Re:Not that surprising by scourfish · · Score: 1

      Square's obsessions lately go far deeper than cutscenes. It seems that Square, being the RPG sweatshop that it is, has lately been interested in making every male characters in their games more emo and homoerotic than the previous and every female character less clothed. Sadly, this means that "fanfiction writer" has become a viable market demographic.

    7. Re:Not that surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Note that MGS4 cutscenes are not pre-rendered.

      It's also interesting how some rumors that there were long cut scenes, the longest of which was "nearly 90 minutes" got transformed into multiple cutscenes over 90 minutes.

    8. Re:Not that surprising by tepples · · Score: 1

      All Subspace Emissary cut scenes can be skipped in their entirety without the player missing anything. They're in there mostly to give players an excuse to switch characters.

    9. Re:Not that surprising by Wicko · · Score: 1

      While I agree about cutscenes using the engine are a little more immersive, I'd still prefer to have Square's cutscenes, just because I find them very rewarding. A lot of care has been put into them, and probably cost considerably more time and effort to make them. But I think you underestimate Square's ability to make pre-rendered cutscenes, in-game engines are still pretty far off in terms of detail, if Advent Children or even Spirits Within is any indication.

    10. Re:Not that surprising by apoc06 · · Score: 1

      1) MSG4 does not have cutscenes over 90 minutes long.

      2) more importantly, MGS4 does all of its cutscenes within the game engine. i cant recall a single FMV cutscene in any MG game [correct me if i'm wrong here, but i have played every single one]

      3) if anything, i would bet that the high quality audio takes up a significant portion of that space. [in game voice, cutscene audio, effects, music, the various "retro" music and podcasts available on your in game ipod]

      4) in terms of pure HD video, there are a few shorts that are thrown in as easter eggs. but in total, i dont think they would take up more than one or two gigs.

    11. Re:Not that surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I feel the same way about the cutscenes. I like them to be somewhat spread out, and kept short. A big movie should be under 10 minutes of continuous non-control, most of the minor cutscenes should be 2 or 3 minutes or less without giving me control for a least a couple minutes.

      Some people responding to this seem to be missing the point. I have no gripe about how much SPACE is being taken up by the cutscenes. It's about how LONG a cutscene runs. I can crush the extended Lord of the Rings series into a 2gig MP3 to watch on my cellphone, it still takes 12 hours to watch.
      I don't mind watching an intro, conclusion, or major plot elements in a game. The rest of the game needs to have *brief* cutscenes (under 5 minutes, MAX) or interactive ones that use the gameplay engine so that it's not totally hands-off.

      I think it just goes to show that the developers are getting more out-of-touch with the audiences.

    12. Re:Not that surprising by ShadowsHawk · · Score: 1

      90 freaking minutes?? I barely have time to finish a level on Zack & Wiki these days. I haven't made a RPG purchase in over two years for the sole fact that I can't invest 40-80 hours into a game anymore.

    13. Re:Not that surprising by PixelScuba · · Score: 1

      The Elder Scrolls: Oblivion and Mass Effect, arguably, have more dialog than Metal Gear Solid 4... multiple discussions, different paths... and yet both games fit on a single DVD. Visually, Mass Effect and MGS4 seem to be on par, neither game looks more outstanding, visually, than the other. How can Bethesda and Bioware make games with TONS of dialog and artwork fit on a single DVD and, yet, MGS4 requires 50 gigs?

      I don't buy it, even Rockstar fit the entirety of GTAIV on a DVD with no comparative loss to it's PS3 counterpart. If MGS4 actually uses 50 gigs and can't fit on a DVD, somebody needs to teach Konami a thing or two about game development.

    14. Re:Not that surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unlike you, I'm all for cut-scenes especially if they are in HD. What's the point of playing a game and don't get rewarded at the end? After spending 50+ hours, surely you would like to see some great scenery and music to get some satisfaction. Also, watching the intro movie can be quite uplifting and encourages you to get into the game.

    15. Re:Not that surprising by apoc06 · · Score: 1

      1) i dont think that MGSIV uses 50 gigs. maybe a tad bit more than the space available on a single layer blu-ray disc, but def not all 50 gigs.

      2) mass effect looks excellent, but between the numerous glitches and uneven texture work, i dont see the two being on the same level.

      3) bioware admitted that they left out several things in mass effect due to size constraints and time restrictions.

      4) all dialog in oblivion is not spoken, voices are recycled and the soundtrack isnt as expansive as the multiple soundtracks in MSG4. TESIV:O also needed to utilize DLC for content due to certain quests not being able to fit onto the DVD9. [with the noteable exception of the horse armor, most of the extra content fit onto the single layer blu-ray version]

      5) the conversations in oblivion are rather short compared to a long-winded MGS conversation. That is a design/ storytelling decision. I mean honestly, how long does a conversation need to be when all you're doing is asking the player to go fetch some item?

      6) RE: GTAIV, most of the audio in the game [the radio stations] are pretty low quality. many of the textures in GTAIV are relatively low quality as well. they took their time and compressed everything just as you suggest. however, in the end what did they arrive at? a GTA game that runs in HD, but is SMALLER than their last dvd9 title. although it looks better than the last GTA, it isnt an order of magnitude better looking.

      7) the question you need to ask about GTA4 is: well the xbox360 version is just as good as the ps3 version, but... given the space, just how good would the ps3 version have been had they not have had to worry about space constraints?

      I agree, that if they absolutely needed to, they could have fit MGSIV onto a DVD9. ive seen scene demos squeeze amazing things into relatively small packages, so of course it could be done. however, they were attempting to provide the highest cinema level quality game available. why force everything into a package that suits the lowest common denominator if you have the liberty not to? constantly serving the lowest common denominator every single time will do nothing except hold you back from seeing your vision through. games would never progress that way. why do you want people to cut corners where they dont have to?

    16. Re:Not that surprising by Yusaku+Godai · · Score: 1

      Plus, from what I've seen of FFXIII so far, the game engine's graphics are good enough that the difference between it, and the prerendered cutscenes is not anywhere near as jarring as in previous games. It's actually sometimes almost hard to tell. It's just easier for them to animate more complicated scenes if it's prerendered, and they don't have two worry about how many polygons or textures they can have.

    17. Re:Not that surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, watching the intro movie can be quite uplifting and encourages you to get into the game. Yes, maybe like 5 minutes to kind of frame the story and set up the universe. Square took it too far with a couple of the newer Final Fantasies that I tried (FFX and FFVII:RW). I got bored with all the cut scenes. I wanted to acually control a character but they just kept on going and going.
  8. Odd Decision by neostorm · · Score: 1, Funny

    Wasn't there a huge meeting at Square recently where they decided they would no longer develop anything that wasn't for the mainstream? Keeping FF13 PS3 only seems to fly in the face of that, considering it's the least popular of the current three consoles. I bet it will be ported eventually.

    1. Re:Odd Decision by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      One of the reasons it's less popular is that all the RPG gamers are still playing games on their PS2's! There were PS2 RPGs released this year. All those PS2 RPG gamers are going to go PS3 (back compat versions) when they get around to releasing RPG's for it, because they can keep playing the HUGE PS2/PS1 RPG libraries.

    2. Re:Odd Decision by KDR_11k · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Too bad the back compat versions are no longer sold. Well, at least you can just keep your PS2 around...

      Is it just me or does the 360 seem to get the most RPGs out of the three current consoles? I don't have one but I see more stories announcing RPGs for that thing than for the PS3 and Wii combined.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    3. Re:Odd Decision by Draconix · · Score: 1

      It does, but that's not saying much. The PS2 still gets a lot more.

      --
      By reading this you acknowledge that you have read it.
    4. Re:Odd Decision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By the time it's out, 360 and PS3 will be pretty much neck and neck. Last time I saw numbers, it's 13m to PS3, 18m to 360...

    5. Re:Odd Decision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too bad the back compat versions are no longer sold.

      The 80GB versions are backwards compatible. If you didn't know that, you really shouldn't be talking.

      But hey, don't let (easily verifiable) facts get in the way of fanboyism. This is Slashdot, after all.

    6. Re:Odd Decision by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      They don't sell the 80GB anymore. Yes, I just checked, the MGS4 package includes a 40GB PS3, not an 80GB (at least in Europe).

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    7. Re:Odd Decision by Rakarra · · Score: 1
      The 80GB versions are backwards compatible. If you didn't know that, you really shouldn't be talking.



      What 80GB versions? The 40GB ones are the only ones sold in stores now, and the only way to get an 80GB one is to plunk down $800-$900 on eBay.

  9. Conversely... by solios · · Score: 1

    ... I bought a Playstation for FF7. Got it, played it, hated it. The story was palatable (despite a loathsome protagonist), but I hated - HATED - the incessant load time and the overly streamlined gameplay. Yeah, the game was a breakthrough for streaming off of the disk, but it basically swapped "loading..." for gameplay that felt like it was slow motion underwater sludge. I traded my playstation for a laptop. Years later I tried 8 and didn't care for it; 9 and didn't care for it, the anthologies and didn't care for them thanks to load time... then I bought a DS, played all of the old Final Fantasies that I loved in GBA mode (without load time), and have been enjoying Square's portable titles ever since - particularly The World Ends With You, which seems to have finally struck a balance between gameplay and story. The DS version of FF3 is playable, but managed to bring the incessant "loading..." sludginess the playstation titles have along for the ride, which hurts the replay value for me.

    Did I buy the DS for Squenix titles? No. I bought it for Castlevania titles. But the Square games are so much more satisfying when I can grind on the bus or in the bathroom instead of spending dozens of hours welded to my couch. Gaming in general is more satisfying when I can pick it up and put it down - turn it on and turn it off - without waiting and waiting for it to load.

  10. Remember the PS1 by tepples · · Score: 1

    FF doesn't require amazing graphics If that were true, Square wouldn't have been so insistent on having the increased storage of an optical disc during the FF7 days, and Square wouldn't have spread mush rumors about the N64 that ended up moving the developers of all RPGs but two (Quest 64 and Aidyn Chronicles) to the PS1.
    1. Re:Remember the PS1 by CastrTroy · · Score: 4, Informative

      The storage space was more about full motion video than it was/is about good graphics. You can't put FMV and CD Quality sound on a cartridge. This time around Nintendo put DVD on the Wii, and it has just as much storage as the XBox. The PS3 has blu-ray, which adds a ton of storage, but I've never seen FF shy away from using multiple discs. The N64 had more than enough power to display all the graphics that FF and any other RPG of it's time had. It was actually better at actual graphics than the PS1. The PS1 just had a lot more storage space. For a quick comparison. Zelda: Ocarina of Time was under 30 MB. FF VII, I believed, filled up 4 CDs.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    2. Re:Remember the PS1 by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1

      You can't put FMV and CD Quality sound on a cartridge.

      Resident Evil 2 for N64 begs to disagree with you. To a certain extent, at least.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  11. SPOILER WARNING by tepples · · Score: 2, Interesting

    So assuming everything being equivalent between the two, codecs and all, it would fit on 3 DVD-9's anyway. That's plenty of assumption. Xbox 360 games have a session with error messages for both DVD players and original Xbox consoles. But more importantly, how much disc swapping would you expect to do? FF7 duplicated the game engine on all three discs, and it was criticized for having gameplay linear enough that most of the data that pertains to a particular part of the game (before Aeris dies, after Aeris dies, final battle and ending) could be kept on a single disc.
    1. Re:SPOILER WARNING by ifrag · · Score: 1

      Good point. My case would be valid if we were talking about a PC game install, but I wasn't thinking in terms of console requirements.

      I suppose you could argue that the game could actually be installed if the user had the large Xbox360 hard drive (120gb). However I think that would be an excessive requirement for a single game.

      --
      Fear is the mind killer.
    2. Re:SPOILER WARNING by tlhIngan · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I suppose you could argue that the game could actually be installed if the user had the large Xbox360 hard drive (120gb). However I think that would be an excessive requirement for a single game.


      A lot of the later PS3 games require installation. I believe Grand Theft Auto needs ~4GB of hard drive space (it's printed on the back of the game). And from my PS3 experience (I own one), installing games can be one way to do it. Download a game from PSN, and it comes in a "capsule" that you click and install (why?!?! It's not like you can copy it off to a memory card...). Then after waiting for it to be installed, you click the new version and the game launches.

      Not sure if the PS3 discs do that (probably just start up and ask to install).

      About the only real thing one notices about the PS3 is that doing almost anything involves reading an EULA before you can do anything. (Besides the initial set up - installing games often pops up another EULA, as do software updates). So the "installation experience" is already here...
    3. Re:SPOILER WARNING by apoc06 · · Score: 1

      the EULA before everything is just sony's way of doing things. most of the online titles for the ps2 made you re-accept the EULA each time you started them as well.

  12. Do you really want Uwe Boll by tepples · · Score: 1

    I want to play games. I don't want to sit around watching movies. If I wanted to watch a movie, I'd watch a movie. If different teams make the game and the movie, you get crap like Super Mario Bros. (1993) that doesn't follow the game at all. Would you rather have cut scenes or Uwe Boll?
  13. Optical drives break by tepples · · Score: 1

    Well, at least you can just keep your PS2 around Until it breaks. When did Sony stop making the PS1?
  14. Cut scenes in the game engine by tepples · · Score: 1

    The storage space was more about full motion video than it was/is about good graphics. Then why not just do the cut scenes in the game engine like FF1-3 for NES, FF4-6 for SNES, and Metal Gear Solid for PS1 did?

    You can't put FMV and CD Quality sound on a cartridge. PS1 FMV audio wasn't exactly CD quality either. It was usually 4-bit ADPCM at 38 kHz, not 16-bit linear PCM at 44.1 kHz. Stronger audio codecs such as MP2 were capable of running on N64, and both Star Fox 64 and Star Wars: Rogue Squadron used this.

    FF VII, I believed, filled up 4 CDs. I thought FF7 was 3 discs and FF8 was 4.
    1. Re:Cut scenes in the game engine by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      Then why not just do the cut scenes in the game engine like FF1-3 for NES, FF4-6 for SNES, and Metal Gear Solid for PS1 did?
      I'm not sure why they didn't do that. It worked just fine for Ocarina of Time, which was wildly popular. It may be easier to do certiain things in FMV, especailly when the game engine doesn't support all the special effects you want to show. When the CD based systems first hit the shelves, all the developers were really excited about FMV, because they couldn't do it previously.
      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
  15. Once Upon a Time... by AioKits · · Score: 1

    Cutscenes were used to treat the player for undertaking the long arduous quest of whatever is important in the game. Giving them a break and some eye candy as a way of saying 'job well done, look at the pretty thing we made for you! Go ahead, sit back, watch'... This is one of the reasons why I still like the 'cutscenes' from FF6 (FF3 for the states). Especially at the halfway mark in the game when the world gets royally screwed.

    Now it seems like cutscenes are being used to drive the story instead of embellishing it. While just my opinion I don't really like having a cutscene every 20 or so odd minutes when just a simple NPC dialog would do. I gave up after FF9, and haven't played anything past that for more than a few hours, usually at a friend's house. I'll shut up now, as my old school nostalgia will probably draw fire from people saying I am remembering things that never were.

    Secret of Mana was another good one...

    --
    "Quote me as saying I was mis-quoted." -Groucho Marx
  16. Still PS3 Only? by Chameleon+Man · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    That's not what my PS3 emulator says!

  17. Balls out boys! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's Wii strokin' time!

  18. No PS3 Core by tepples · · Score: 1

    A lot of the later PS3 games require installation. They can get away with that because there was no PS3 Core System.
  19. Agito by Quattro+Vezina · · Score: 1

    Is anyone else wondering why FFXIII is borrowing its title from a Kamen Rider series?

    I doubt anything they (or anyone for that matter) can make can even approach Kamen Rider Agito's level of awesomeness.

    --
    I support the Center for Consumer Freedom