Have Phoenix downs ever actually reversed death? Even if that's what in the description, they really seem to work more like salts. Running out of HP in a Final Fantasy means that character is knocked out. He's not dead, but you need to revive him. After all, if you don't revive a downed character, they're still alive (albeit with only 1 HP, except for FF:T, where they disappear if you don't revive them in time and stay gone).
Yes, it's hard to be internally consistent when a big portion of your game is battling, but that cutscene seems to have solidified the difference between dead and knocked out.
Hm. I didn't know it was originally slated for the N64. That would explain some of the blockiness. And I agree with your stance on sequelitis. I'd pick up the remake when it went bargain bin for the reasons outlined above, but I don't think I'll be picking up anything else unless I find a really good deal on it.
But when you think about it, now would be the time to do this. They've already got some of the work done. They needed character models for Advent Children. I'd be willing to bet VII remake and Advent Children look _very_ similar in terms of graphics. And all the FF VII fanboys will buy it on release day. I'm not seeing the downside for them here. Milk the game for all it's worth. I guarentee SquareEnix is in it for the money more than the fans (as much as the two can be separated anyway).
It may not be the non-Final Fantasy franchise you're interested in, but the Front Mission games that make it to the U.S. were both of very high quality with more replayability than your average Final Fantasy. I've been through 3 three times and 4 twice.
I still fail to understand why fan desires should change the narrative. What you're proposing is similar to asking J.K.Rowling to rewrite the Harry Potter series with yourself as a love interest "because you'd like to see it happen."
The story is what it is. SquareEnix isn't beyond delaying a game because it isn't done yet. Maybe in some prior iteration Aeris came back, but in the final product she dies and stays that way, and the story is better for it.
What did I miss? The methods outlining how to "revive" her involve a GameShark. If they wanted Aeris to be revivable, she would be. Besides, sacrificing one's life doesn't have anywhere near as much emotional pull when that character is fine and kicking ass again in 20 minutes. When death is permanent, it means something.
VI has beautiful graphics. If SquareEnix really wants to make more money off of it, they could let Nintendo offer it up for download on the Revolution. They've already got the SNES code. More money with zero work for them. From a business standpoint, what reason do they have to remake VI?
Why would you be able to reverse a major plot point just because it's being remade?
When they ported IV to the PSX should you have been able to skip Cecil's transition from Dark Knight to Paladin? No. It's an integral part of the story.
Good. I don't think it's the greatest Final Fantasy out there, but it definitely didn't age well. Compare its graphics to the other 2 PSX Final Fantasies, and you'll see what I mean. FF VII is easily to worst looking in the entire series (assuming you replace the NES graphics from I and II with the graphics from Origins and/or Dawn of Souls), and a graphical update would make me much more prone to play it again.
It can very easily be both. Is Hitchhiker's Guide science fiction or comedy? Entertainment doesn't need to be pigeonholed into only one genre, nor should it be. Let it be what it is and apply any and all labels that apply if you're intent on labelling things.
It's Wind Waker. Link (nor anybody else) does no walking on any winds. The Wind Waker is the baton used to control (wake) the winds. I can only assume that there would have been Pegasus Boots if Link was a Wind Walker.
It may be more than your average first person shooter, but your post proved that it's an FPS. It's played in the first person (primarily), and you shoot things. It _is_ an FPS.
This is similar to the way that a square is also a rectangle. You can separate the two all you want, but one is a subset of the other.
Forsaken Fortress I and II may be the same place, but with different objective sets and play styles, I tend to think of them as two separate levels. 7 seemed plenty long to me, but a Zelda I-esque second quest would have been most welcome.
If you want to see 3-D done right, and you like a platformer ever now and then, try one of the Sly Cooper games. They both control extremely well, and they're both very fun. Sly 1 can be had for $20 (greatest hits). The only con I can really think of is that the first game is a bit on the short side.
There were 8 dungeons and 2 mini-dungeons, and Tower of the Gods was pretty long (if I remember correctly).
Forsaken Fortress I* Dragon Roost Cavern Forbidden Woods Tower of the the Gods Forsaken Fortress II Fire Mountain** Ice Ring Isle** Earth Temple Wind Temple Ganon's Tower
*no boss - but you were reclaiming your sword **mini-dungeon - you need the items here
I guess it all depends on your opinion of the games. I liked Wind Waker a lot more than Ocarina. Link to the Past was great and worth buying on GBA for Four Swords, and Four Swords Adventures is an excellent game to play with friends (who doesn't have a GBA by now)? I also enjoyed Minish Cap a lot.
Their track record re: LoZ looks good from where I'm standing.
I liked Wind Waker a lot, too. Link controlled smoothly; I thought the story was good. I even liked sailing. The world felt large and alive.
I've never even finished Ocarina of Time. I've never been beyond the Fire Temple. I just can't control Link quite right. Well-received as it was, I don't think the N64 was quite the right time to move Zelda into three dimensions.
Some of these have been mentioned as kid-friendly games already, but have you considered platformers or light RPGs?
Sly Cooper series (PS2): cartoony, fun, not too hard. Yes, you're a thief, but you're a good thief).
Ratchet and Clank series (PS2): fun, can get challenging, great weapon diversity.
Jak series (PS2): pretty fun, III had a great mix of levels, too, so it never got boring.
I-Ninja (if you can find a cheap one) (multi): decent platformer. Ninja moves slower than I'd like, but it's a good time.
Mario RPG series (Super Mario RPG, Paper Mario, Mario and Luigi: Superstar Saga, Paper Mario 2) (SNES, N64, GBA, GCN): all good introductions to RPGs. Turn-based battles that aren't boring (especially Paper Mario 2).
Legend of Zelda Four Swords Adventures (GCN): Yes, you'll need GBAs, but it's worth it. Simple control scheme, an easy inventory, LttP-inspired graphics, and excellent multiplayer make this a great choice for parents who want to game with kids.
X-Men Legends (multi): A little more complex, but the difficulty and learning curve is pretty light. And since it's multiplayer, a good parent player can carry a weaker child player while still having fun. Also, multiple X-Men available means when your child's avatar falls, you can just go snag him/her a new one from a save point.
Mario sports (GCN): Yes, they're games that don't _need_ to feature Mario, but Mario sports titles have tight interfaces, are easy to get into, and are all around fun. My dad (50+) bought a GameCube and Mario Golf. Only game he owns, and we play it almost every time I visit.
Puzzle games (multi): If your kid's into puzzles, there are some great ones out there. Super Puzzle Fighter II Turbo, Polarium, Lumines, Tetris, Meteos, Dr. Mario, etc. Not only do these games foster problem solving, but most feature quick head-to-head play, too.
I don't think they've left the children behind. They just haven't given up on their first customers, and now they've got that much more market. Let's use RPGs as an example.
Pokemon: cute, easy to learn, good value. This one's for kids. You've just introduced a 10 year old to hit points and turn based battles.
Final Fantasy: middle of the road. This one's accessible to everybody, but adults will probably do better than your average 13 year old. The stories are starting to pick up here.
Disgaea: almost definitely for a more mature (read patient) crowd. The story is there, but the focus is now on the battles themselves. The thinking person will definitely triumph over the button-masher here.
By the time little Johnny grows up, he'll have made it through all three types of RPG, and along the way he'll have given the video game industry its fair share of his money.
Games appeal to everybody. _That's_ what game developers have realized. They can sell to 20 year olds just as well (if not better) as they can to 10 year olds.
Re:escapist magazine and HTML skills
on
Gamer Nation
·
· Score: 1
It would seem we agree somewhat. I encounter primarily higher monitor resolutions also, but there are those among us who still use 800 x 600. Also, not everybody browses full screen.
But yes, stretchable content is good. What I was trying to convey was that 800 is an acceptable maximum for fixed-width designs (like the site in question) so that even those people that use 800 x 600 (elderly*, outdated equipment*, bad eyesight) can still view the site in its entirety.
For what it's worth, I run either 1280 x 1024, and I still think designing for a width of 750 is the way to go. It allows me to have more going on than just the Internet.
*Yes, I realize that the typical gamer is most likely neither elderly nor using outdated equipment.
Is this more or less strict than how comparably rated movies are sold? I can remember being carded to purchase R-rated movies as a kid, but I'm not sure if that was store policy (Wal*Mart) or law.
Slashdot Mirror
It's an intro RPG, bu Final Fantasy: Mystic Quest was released here first.
Have Phoenix downs ever actually reversed death? Even if that's what in the description, they really seem to work more like salts. Running out of HP in a Final Fantasy means that character is knocked out. He's not dead, but you need to revive him. After all, if you don't revive a downed character, they're still alive (albeit with only 1 HP, except for FF:T, where they disappear if you don't revive them in time and stay gone).
Yes, it's hard to be internally consistent when a big portion of your game is battling, but that cutscene seems to have solidified the difference between dead and knocked out.
Hm. I didn't know it was originally slated for the N64. That would explain some of the blockiness. And I agree with your stance on sequelitis. I'd pick up the remake when it went bargain bin for the reasons outlined above, but I don't think I'll be picking up anything else unless I find a really good deal on it.
But when you think about it, now would be the time to do this. They've already got some of the work done. They needed character models for Advent Children. I'd be willing to bet VII remake and Advent Children look _very_ similar in terms of graphics. And all the FF VII fanboys will buy it on release day. I'm not seeing the downside for them here. Milk the game for all it's worth. I guarentee SquareEnix is in it for the money more than the fans (as much as the two can be separated anyway).
It may not be the non-Final Fantasy franchise you're interested in, but the Front Mission games that make it to the U.S. were both of very high quality with more replayability than your average Final Fantasy. I've been through 3 three times and 4 twice.
I still fail to understand why fan desires should change the narrative. What you're proposing is similar to asking J.K.Rowling to rewrite the Harry Potter series with yourself as a love interest "because you'd like to see it happen."
The story is what it is. SquareEnix isn't beyond delaying a game because it isn't done yet. Maybe in some prior iteration Aeris came back, but in the final product she dies and stays that way, and the story is better for it.
What did I miss? The methods outlining how to "revive" her involve a GameShark. If they wanted Aeris to be revivable, she would be. Besides, sacrificing one's life doesn't have anywhere near as much emotional pull when that character is fine and kicking ass again in 20 minutes. When death is permanent, it means something.
200 hours? Methinks you've confused SquareEnix games with Nippon Ichi ones.
VI has beautiful graphics. If SquareEnix really wants to make more money off of it, they could let Nintendo offer it up for download on the Revolution. They've already got the SNES code. More money with zero work for them. From a business standpoint, what reason do they have to remake VI?
Why would you be able to reverse a major plot point just because it's being remade?
When they ported IV to the PSX should you have been able to skip Cecil's transition from Dark Knight to Paladin? No. It's an integral part of the story.
Good. I don't think it's the greatest Final Fantasy out there, but it definitely didn't age well. Compare its graphics to the other 2 PSX Final Fantasies, and you'll see what I mean. FF VII is easily to worst looking in the entire series (assuming you replace the NES graphics from I and II with the graphics from Origins and/or Dawn of Souls), and a graphical update would make me much more prone to play it again.
It's not huge, but Ogre Battle 64 and Paper Mario are both worth playing.
And although not RPGs per se, I think an PRGer would probably like DK64, Bajo-Kazooie (and its sequel), and Conker's Bad Fur Day.
Why did cliche villain Wario become a major character, and then only for the Game Boy?
It may not have been the greatest game made, but Wario was the star of Wario World for the GCN.
That would explain why I didn't know about it. I avoided Tingle like the plague.
It can very easily be both. Is Hitchhiker's Guide science fiction or comedy? Entertainment doesn't need to be pigeonholed into only one genre, nor should it be. Let it be what it is and apply any and all labels that apply if you're intent on labelling things.
It's Wind Waker. Link (nor anybody else) does no walking on any winds. The Wind Waker is the baton used to control (wake) the winds. I can only assume that there would have been Pegasus Boots if Link was a Wind Walker.
It may be more than your average first person shooter, but your post proved that it's an FPS. It's played in the first person (primarily), and you shoot things. It _is_ an FPS.
This is similar to the way that a square is also a rectangle. You can separate the two all you want, but one is a subset of the other.
Forsaken Fortress I and II may be the same place, but with different objective sets and play styles, I tend to think of them as two separate levels. 7 seemed plenty long to me, but a Zelda I-esque second quest would have been most welcome.
If you want to see 3-D done right, and you like a platformer ever now and then, try one of the Sly Cooper games. They both control extremely well, and they're both very fun. Sly 1 can be had for $20 (greatest hits). The only con I can really think of is that the first game is a bit on the short side.
There were 8 dungeons and 2 mini-dungeons, and Tower of the Gods was pretty long (if I remember correctly).
Forsaken Fortress I*
Dragon Roost Cavern
Forbidden Woods
Tower of the the Gods
Forsaken Fortress II
Fire Mountain**
Ice Ring Isle**
Earth Temple
Wind Temple
Ganon's Tower
*no boss - but you were reclaiming your sword
**mini-dungeon - you need the items here
I guess it all depends on your opinion of the games. I liked Wind Waker a lot more than Ocarina. Link to the Past was great and worth buying on GBA for Four Swords, and Four Swords Adventures is an excellent game to play with friends (who doesn't have a GBA by now)? I also enjoyed Minish Cap a lot.
Their track record re: LoZ looks good from where I'm standing.
I liked Wind Waker a lot, too. Link controlled smoothly; I thought the story was good. I even liked sailing. The world felt large and alive.
I've never even finished Ocarina of Time. I've never been beyond the Fire Temple. I just can't control Link quite right. Well-received as it was, I don't think the N64 was quite the right time to move Zelda into three dimensions.
Some of these have been mentioned as kid-friendly games already, but have you considered platformers or light RPGs?
Sly Cooper series (PS2): cartoony, fun, not too hard. Yes, you're a thief, but you're a good thief).
Ratchet and Clank series (PS2): fun, can get challenging, great weapon diversity.
Jak series (PS2): pretty fun, III had a great mix of levels, too, so it never got boring.
I-Ninja (if you can find a cheap one) (multi): decent platformer. Ninja moves slower than I'd like, but it's a good time.
Mario RPG series (Super Mario RPG, Paper Mario, Mario and Luigi: Superstar Saga, Paper Mario 2) (SNES, N64, GBA, GCN): all good introductions to RPGs. Turn-based battles that aren't boring (especially Paper Mario 2).
Legend of Zelda Four Swords Adventures (GCN): Yes, you'll need GBAs, but it's worth it. Simple control scheme, an easy inventory, LttP-inspired graphics, and excellent multiplayer make this a great choice for parents who want to game with kids.
X-Men Legends (multi): A little more complex, but the difficulty and learning curve is pretty light. And since it's multiplayer, a good parent player can carry a weaker child player while still having fun. Also, multiple X-Men available means when your child's avatar falls, you can just go snag him/her a new one from a save point.
Kart racers (Mario, Crash, etc.) (multi): quick, easy, fun, 'nuff said.
Mario sports (GCN): Yes, they're games that don't _need_ to feature Mario, but Mario sports titles have tight interfaces, are easy to get into, and are all around fun. My dad (50+) bought a GameCube and Mario Golf. Only game he owns, and we play it almost every time I visit.
Puzzle games (multi): If your kid's into puzzles, there are some great ones out there. Super Puzzle Fighter II Turbo, Polarium, Lumines, Tetris, Meteos, Dr. Mario, etc. Not only do these games foster problem solving, but most feature quick head-to-head play, too.
I don't think they've left the children behind. They just haven't given up on their first customers, and now they've got that much more market. Let's use RPGs as an example.
Pokemon: cute, easy to learn, good value. This one's for kids. You've just introduced a 10 year old to hit points and turn based battles.
Final Fantasy: middle of the road. This one's accessible to everybody, but adults will probably do better than your average 13 year old. The stories are starting to pick up here.
Disgaea: almost definitely for a more mature (read patient) crowd. The story is there, but the focus is now on the battles themselves. The thinking person will definitely triumph over the button-masher here.
By the time little Johnny grows up, he'll have made it through all three types of RPG, and along the way he'll have given the video game industry its fair share of his money.
Games appeal to everybody. _That's_ what game developers have realized. They can sell to 20 year olds just as well (if not better) as they can to 10 year olds.
It would seem we agree somewhat. I encounter primarily higher monitor resolutions also, but there are those among us who still use 800 x 600. Also, not everybody browses full screen.
But yes, stretchable content is good. What I was trying to convey was that 800 is an acceptable maximum for fixed-width designs (like the site in question) so that even those people that use 800 x 600 (elderly*, outdated equipment*, bad eyesight) can still view the site in its entirety.
For what it's worth, I run either 1280 x 1024, and I still think designing for a width of 750 is the way to go. It allows me to have more going on than just the Internet.
*Yes, I realize that the typical gamer is most likely neither elderly nor using outdated equipment.
Is this more or less strict than how comparably rated movies are sold? I can remember being carded to purchase R-rated movies as a kid, but I'm not sure if that was store policy (Wal*Mart) or law.