If you insist on both turn-based and non-linear to have a good time, might I reccommend Disgaea: Hour of Darkness? And to a lesser extent, La Pucelle: Tactics and Phantom Brave?
All three titles are from Nippon Ichi, and they're all SRPGs, but they're turn-based, deep, and non-linear. You can replay stages and you only advance the story when you want to. If you're willing to give on the non-linearity, Gladius from LucasArts (another SRPG) has a great battle system, and you can replay fights whenever you want (until you leave your current zone for a new one).
Also, I'm sorry. I responded a bit too quickly, but it seems you might do better to branch out as you seem to enjoy games that meet pretty strict cirteria.
How have they been moving so far away from turn-based gameplay?
Final Fantasy X and Final Fantasy Tactics Advance were a turn-based RPG fan's wet dream, and they're both on the current generation of consoles.
Final Fantasy X-2 could be slowed down. Battles were still in active time, but they weren't the lightning-fast affairs you make them out to be.
Final Fantasy XI was their first foray into the realm of MMOs. As soon as you show me a good turn-based MMO, I'll go play it, but as the field seems to stand right now, an MMO has to be real-time to be viable in the market.
Voice-over: Just when you thought it was safe to use MS Word... Clippy: So, it looks like you're writing a letter... Voice-over: This summer, experience the terror of the The Office "Assistant"!
I figure I'll play the games first. I still don't own an XBox, but the price ought to fall quickly after the 360 launches. Then I'll have cheap games to play for a long time.
It could be a legitimate attempt at a multimedia franchise. There are already novels being published and toys being produces. I don't know if they're canon, but I'm sure they're selling.
This isn't as huge a leap as you're making it out to be. People have been emulating prior generations on consoles since the Dreamcast. If all we wanted in a console was classic game emulation, we'd all play on our Dreamcasts, PCs, and/or modded XBoxes.
Nintendo's angle with the Revolution is this: we don't all have the need or desire to run Linux on things. We don't all have the need or desire to install emulators on consoles. There's a huge segment of the video gaming market that doesn't know how to download, install, and run an emulator. These are the people Nintendo is selling to. If people are willing to pay $20 a pop for NES games on the GBA with no graphical update, Nintendo's going to rake in the money when Mommy and Daddy can download classics at the push of a button.
A couple things. I'm going to answer out of order. I'm sure you'll be able to follow along with me here.
We don't all pirate our games. Piracy isn't the only alternative to climbing game prices. I wait for titles to go Greatest Hits / Player's Choice / Platinum Hits, buy used from EBGames or Gamestop, or trade with others.
Some of us do vote with our wallets. I still haven't bought a PSP or a DS. They're just not worth the money to me yet. As soon as the price drops (assuming it does), I would like to own both. The same applies to games. I'm having a blast with Sly 2: Band of Thieves, but I didn't want to pay $50 for it. Did I pirate a copy? No. I bought a used copy.
I don't play any games I have to continuously buy. World or Warcraft looks great and fun, but I won't play if I have to buy the game and then buy the game again every month. Once again, I've voted with my wallet, and Blizzard isn't getting my money twice. As soon as somebody releases the MMO for free, I'll consider paying a monthly fee to play.
We don't all need flashy graphics. My absolute favorite game from the current generation of consoles is Disgaea for the PS2. Aside from some of the special move effects, I'd bet the battle system and maps could have fit on a single PSX CD. I've easily put over 100 hours into that game, and it's definitely not the graphics that hooked me. It was the gameplay.
All that being said, I won't be buying any new games for $60 - $65. I'll buy them when the prices drop or I'll buy them second-hand. Who among us, regardless of hobby, isn't cheap? Do you really love your hobby so much that you blindly throw money at it? What about the next generation of games warrant a $10 - $15 price increase? I haven't seen anything. Is the PS3 or XBox 360 really that much harder to program for? If not, I see no reason for game prices to rise just because we're on the cusp of a generation change.
In all honesty, VI (and IV for that matter) is prettier than VII. As a matter of fact, in terms of graphical beauty, I think the entire previous generation should be skipped.
SNES and Genesis graphics (although 2-D) looked better than most N64 and PSX titles. There are some graphical gems in there, but does anybody seriously think that VII's blocky 3-D graphics are easier on the eyes than VI's 2-D detailed graphics?
Video game makers didn't get 3-D right until the current generation for the most part*. Look at Castlevania. Stories aside, Lament of Innocence for PS2 looks and controls better than Castlevania 64, and not until FF X did we get true (and populated...anybody else remember the barren 3-D "world" maps?) 3-D environments in an FF. The previous generation couldn't handle all the data and look good doing it.
* Mario 64, and just about anything by Rare for the N64 excepted. Even Zelda wasn't quite ready for the transition for 3-D, in my opinion. Wind Waker was a much smoother experience (regardless of what anybody thinks of the graphical style, the 3-D was done better).
Re:Two fun games that buck the "uber graphics" tre
on
Graphics Don't Matter
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I can't speak for Lego Star Wars, but the graphics in Katamari Damacy were amazing. The sense of scale and size were phenomonal. The models weren't composed of millions of polygons because the individual elements weren't the focus. You were looking at the world as a whole, and KD's engine presented the game world flawlessly. The experience definitely wouldn't have been the same if there were a loading screen every time you needed to zoom out a little.
Good graphics and innovative graphics aren't always about who has the most polygons or the best lighting. Sometimes, they're just about creating the game world properly.
Of your list, I've only played Sands of Time, but I felt my money was well-spent. I'd rather pay for an incredible short game that's fun enough to play more than once than a mediocre long game any day.
We don't all have 40+ hours to devote to video games. I'd like to, but I'm much more prone to pick up a Sly Cooper nowadays than take my chances on an epic because I have a life outside of gaming.
I want fun, I want attractive, and I want the gameplay to be rock solid. Sands of Time definitely delivered that for me.
And while I'm making a wish-list, more games need good co-op multiplayer. My fiancee likes to play with me, not against me. So far, we've had more fun with X-Men Legends than any game featuring death match.
Slashdot Mirror
If you insist on both turn-based and non-linear to have a good time, might I reccommend Disgaea: Hour of Darkness? And to a lesser extent, La Pucelle: Tactics and Phantom Brave?
All three titles are from Nippon Ichi, and they're all SRPGs, but they're turn-based, deep, and non-linear. You can replay stages and you only advance the story when you want to. If you're willing to give on the non-linearity, Gladius from LucasArts (another SRPG) has a great battle system, and you can replay fights whenever you want (until you leave your current zone for a new one).
Also, I'm sorry. I responded a bit too quickly, but it seems you might do better to branch out as you seem to enjoy games that meet pretty strict cirteria.
Batman (1989) and Batman Returns (1992) are both classics, in my opinion.
How have they been moving so far away from turn-based gameplay?
Final Fantasy X and Final Fantasy Tactics Advance were a turn-based RPG fan's wet dream, and they're both on the current generation of consoles.
Final Fantasy X-2 could be slowed down. Battles were still in active time, but they weren't the lightning-fast affairs you make them out to be.
Final Fantasy XI was their first foray into the realm of MMOs. As soon as you show me a good turn-based MMO, I'll go play it, but as the field seems to stand right now, an MMO has to be real-time to be viable in the market.
It seems to be lost in development Hell, but StarCraft: Ghost sounds like it will be a lot of fun.
Cid, chocobos, airships, and some of the summons seem to be the only real running themes.
However, some of the universes are definitely related.
Voice-over: Just when you thought it was safe to use MS Word...
Clippy: So, it looks like you're writing a letter...
Voice-over: This summer, experience the terror of the The Office "Assistant"!
I figure I'll play the games first. I still don't own an XBox, but the price ought to fall quickly after the 360 launches. Then I'll have cheap games to play for a long time.
It could be a legitimate attempt at a multimedia franchise. There are already novels being published and toys being produces. I don't know if they're canon, but I'm sure they're selling.
So it's still a tangled mess that may or may not happen? How is that closer?
This isn't as huge a leap as you're making it out to be. People have been emulating prior generations on consoles since the Dreamcast. If all we wanted in a console was classic game emulation, we'd all play on our Dreamcasts, PCs, and/or modded XBoxes.
Nintendo's angle with the Revolution is this: we don't all have the need or desire to run Linux on things. We don't all have the need or desire to install emulators on consoles. There's a huge segment of the video gaming market that doesn't know how to download, install, and run an emulator. These are the people Nintendo is selling to. If people are willing to pay $20 a pop for NES games on the GBA with no graphical update, Nintendo's going to rake in the money when Mommy and Daddy can download classics at the push of a button.
A couple things. I'm going to answer out of order. I'm sure you'll be able to follow along with me here.
We don't all pirate our games. Piracy isn't the only alternative to climbing game prices. I wait for titles to go Greatest Hits / Player's Choice / Platinum Hits, buy used from EBGames or Gamestop, or trade with others.
Some of us do vote with our wallets. I still haven't bought a PSP or a DS. They're just not worth the money to me yet. As soon as the price drops (assuming it does), I would like to own both. The same applies to games. I'm having a blast with Sly 2: Band of Thieves, but I didn't want to pay $50 for it. Did I pirate a copy? No. I bought a used copy.
I don't play any games I have to continuously buy. World or Warcraft looks great and fun, but I won't play if I have to buy the game and then buy the game again every month. Once again, I've voted with my wallet, and Blizzard isn't getting my money twice. As soon as somebody releases the MMO for free, I'll consider paying a monthly fee to play.
We don't all need flashy graphics. My absolute favorite game from the current generation of consoles is Disgaea for the PS2. Aside from some of the special move effects, I'd bet the battle system and maps could have fit on a single PSX CD. I've easily put over 100 hours into that game, and it's definitely not the graphics that hooked me. It was the gameplay.
All that being said, I won't be buying any new games for $60 - $65. I'll buy them when the prices drop or I'll buy them second-hand. Who among us, regardless of hobby, isn't cheap? Do you really love your hobby so much that you blindly throw money at it? What about the next generation of games warrant a $10 - $15 price increase? I haven't seen anything. Is the PS3 or XBox 360 really that much harder to program for? If not, I see no reason for game prices to rise just because we're on the cusp of a generation change.
In all honesty, VI (and IV for that matter) is prettier than VII. As a matter of fact, in terms of graphical beauty, I think the entire previous generation should be skipped.
SNES and Genesis graphics (although 2-D) looked better than most N64 and PSX titles. There are some graphical gems in there, but does anybody seriously think that VII's blocky 3-D graphics are easier on the eyes than VI's 2-D detailed graphics?
Video game makers didn't get 3-D right until the current generation for the most part*. Look at Castlevania. Stories aside, Lament of Innocence for PS2 looks and controls better than Castlevania 64, and not until FF X did we get true (and populated...anybody else remember the barren 3-D "world" maps?) 3-D environments in an FF. The previous generation couldn't handle all the data and look good doing it.
* Mario 64, and just about anything by Rare for the N64 excepted. Even Zelda wasn't quite ready for the transition for 3-D, in my opinion. Wind Waker was a much smoother experience (regardless of what anybody thinks of the graphical style, the 3-D was done better).
I can't speak for Lego Star Wars, but the graphics in Katamari Damacy were amazing. The sense of scale and size were phenomonal. The models weren't composed of millions of polygons because the individual elements weren't the focus. You were looking at the world as a whole, and KD's engine presented the game world flawlessly. The experience definitely wouldn't have been the same if there were a loading screen every time you needed to zoom out a little.
Good graphics and innovative graphics aren't always about who has the most polygons or the best lighting. Sometimes, they're just about creating the game world properly.
Of your list, I've only played Sands of Time, but I felt my money was well-spent. I'd rather pay for an incredible short game that's fun enough to play more than once than a mediocre long game any day. We don't all have 40+ hours to devote to video games. I'd like to, but I'm much more prone to pick up a Sly Cooper nowadays than take my chances on an epic because I have a life outside of gaming. I want fun, I want attractive, and I want the gameplay to be rock solid. Sands of Time definitely delivered that for me. And while I'm making a wish-list, more games need good co-op multiplayer. My fiancee likes to play with me, not against me. So far, we've had more fun with X-Men Legends than any game featuring death match.
I don't have a DS yet, but there are some adventure-esque titles out for it.
Another - this (along with Polarium) is why I want a DS
Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney - lawyer sim / adventure
Sprung - dating sim / adventure
I'm not sure how much adventure is mixed with the sim, but I think the first 2 look interesting.