Googleshng - February 4 '04- 2:00 Eastern Standard Time
It's a strange power of suggestion I command. For instance, just by
writing this sentence, I am vitually guarenteeing that tomorrow, someone will write in on the subject
of Secret of Evermore.
I try to avoid picking on spelling. Some days I have to try really hard.
Hey this is my first time wrighting but I'm pretty shour you dont care. Uh any ways on to my question. Now I have been hearing alot of nagative comment about X-2. That is degrating women. That is dosn't stick to the old way of fanal fantasy and so on. Now i for one really like the game. The battles are high pass and I can actualy injoy spinding hours on end leveling up. Another thing (The question is coming don't worry.) I for one can say that having all diffrent kinds of dress spheres to master that it will prolong the game. Ok the big moment. What are you veiws on the reson people after playing this game are sticking up there noses to this great game and do you not like the fact that you get to kick ass with three fine looking chick.
I don't believe I've ever heard anyone call the game sexist. I've heard people say they'd rather not have
their kids dressing up as the characters, but that's not quite the same thing. I've also never heard anyone
say it was too different from the rest of the series, and if I did I'd have to stare at them long and
hard. We've got the setting of FF10 and the gameplay of FF5 here. I have however heard plenty of people
make the opposite complaint, specifically that too much of the game is recycled. I've also heard people
really chew out the mini-games and the sparseness of story, but the point does still stand that most people
who have played it seem to find it quite fun.
An odd notion.
So I think it is agreed upon that the reader awards were very biased
towards popular (i.e. Square-Enix) games, solely because these were the
games that were most played by the general public. So I propose a new
method for the reader awards in the future. Instead of simply tallying
the votes, why not tally them and then multiply the result by a weighting
factor, something like the total number of rpgs sold in that year
divided by the number of units of said game sold (#rpgs_sold /
#game_sold), maybe scaled to unity (so the game which sold the fewest
number of copies would have a weight of one while games that sold ninety
billion copies would get weighted by like 0.1). This way games that sold
fewer copies would be ranked higher (and more fairly) and the fanboys
wouldn't have so much of an advantage in every category. I think this
would make for a much more unbiased awards ceremony, and the more obscure
games (BoFV, DC2, M&L) might have ranked a bit better.
Interesting idea that, but it would tend to skew things in the other direction. I mean, when a big publisher
has a flagship series, it's because that series has been consistantly enjoyed by people over the years,
causing greater demand for each sequel. It's not like some games are arbitrarily hyped up and shipped
out more than others. Well, not generally. There's always exceptions like Legend of Dragoon.
Told you this'd happen.
It might be surprising to think that a lot of people were looking forward to
Unlimited Saga. ...until you realize how many Square junkies are out there.
Unlimited Saga was _not_ a terrible game, merely misunderstood.
When a game's primary selling point is its "hardcoreness", most RPGamers
need not apply. The battle system was unwieldy at first, but once you read
the manual and figure out what's going on, it actually makes a lot of sense.
Most RPG's have such similar battle systems, it is easy to understand how we
can shun anything that is different. The quests are somewhat like
traditional pencil/paper RPG'ing combined with a turn based strategy game.
The storyline, while very weak on the front ends of each of the stories, was
filled with description and detail of the setting and world's history. If
the game weren't so unwieldy and often repulsing, I think it would have been
an excellent title.
This being said... My guess as to its ranking in the awards was that
readers are used to thumbing their noses at the SaGa series, so it became an
easy target. I would imagine that not half of the people who rated it have
even played it, nor cared to.
Right. Unlimited Saga is great... for a SaGa game. People who actually like the series, one would assume,
would be perfectly happy with it. The majority of people, who avoid it like the plague, one would assume
didn't play US to begin with. It'd be one thing if the category were called Worst Game, but it's Biggest
Letdown, implying there were expectations it didn't live up to.
More of that.
No 10 page manifesto, but I thoroughly loved Unlimited Saga. Like Dragon
Quarter(which I also liked), it was different, it was hard, and required a
more than a bit of thought to finally figure out what was going on. I will
admit to resorting to Gamefaqs Unlimited Saga FAQ pages in an effort to
find out how to play. The game could've definetly used a better manual.
Yeah, there are things that could've been improved. A better manual, and a
slightly less cumbersome interface, but I wouldn't change anything else.
Ah yes. Good old sink or swim SaGa series. Where you spend the first couple hours of each game trying
to figure out the basic mechanics. It's still a lot better than SaGa Frontier though, where playing as
half the characters leaves you completely adrift as to where you should go at any given time if you've
never played the game before.