Is it overrated? Or is the JRPG masterpiece gamers make it out to be?
And don't get butt-hurt. I actually like this game, and played it as a kid back when it came out. But the game often gets praised as one of the best, if not the best, RPGs ever made.
I did several polls here on 4chan asking users what the best Super NES games are. Chrono Trigger won EVERY poll! (Beating out games like Super Metroid and A Link to the Past even.)
Damn. I think the game is alright. It has neat characters, cool time-traveling, and dual tech moves that make battles kinda interesting. But Super Mario RPG has timed-attacks, Breath of Fire III has a masters system, and Final Fantasy 6 is just as good. Yet, none of these games top their respected polls like Chrono Trigger always does.
What makes Chrono Trigger so special?
(I'm writing an article on the history of video games for a website.)
It is a great game that is easy to get into, has some fun battle mechanics due to the team tech skills, and the setting continually changes due to time travel.
Though with that said there are better JRPG's out there with either deeper battle mechanics, customizing characters, character growth, or exploration.
>It has neat characters
Jesus, how long are you guys gonna fall for it, there is no time travelling mechanic, it's just a literal map swap, you don't have a choice in altering the timeline besides the one you have to do in the main story quest, I can't choose to let the Reptites win and then fight Lavos on the Black Omen with the consequences of my choice, it's a LINEAR game there's no functional time travel mechanic to speak of, not even for sidequests.
>But Super Mario RPG has timed-attacks, Breath of Fire III has a masters system, and Final Fantasy 6 is just as good.
How does that makes Chrono Trigger less good? Those are all different mechanics, you either like them or not, that isn't a functional comparison, moreover, BoF is a fifth gen game so it's silly to compare it to a fourth gen game in terms of mechanics.
>Yet, none of these games top their respected polls like Chrono Trigger always does.
You best be joking here.
>What makes Chrono Trigger so special?
Legions of die hard manchildren fanboys.
The game had a lot going for it. It's got character, and the theme and fun are really great. The music and graphics are top notch too. The gameplay is a lot more interesting than most JRPGs as well, especially if you restrict yourself.
That being said, I always felt the battle system was incomplete. My biggest complaint is that it seems the developers had a more complicated battle system planned out that never really got fully implemented. Many techs involve geometry to determine where they strike, however the game pretty much gives you no meaningful tactical control over the positions of your characters during a battle. Had they implemented commands that allowed you to position characters in battle, and moreover used the layout of the field for strategic potential, the game would be unstoppably fun.
I don't have a favorite game, but it is one I come back to every now and then. I'd recommend it to anyone who is into these kinds of games.
>Is it overrated? Or is the JRPG masterpiece gamers make it out to be?
Both. Seriously stop the wole is x overrated thing, I'm pretty sure I love a lot of things half of the world wouldn't give a shit about, in the end it's just about tastes.
>I'm writing an article on the history of video games for a website.
I'm not sure which is sadder: that you're actually researching by asking random fucks on 4chan, or that you'll probably not credit us anyway.
There's no such thing as overrated and underrated. Tastes vary, that's all there is. It's a popular game with good reason, but I've never liked it all that much. What other people think of something doesn't really matter.
>However, I personally prefer ffvi and earthbound, for reasons that I can't really explain.
I can appreciate this.
>Jesus, how long are you guys gonna fall for it, there is no time travelling mechanic, it's just a literal map swap
Chill out there, spergie. Since when does a "time travel" mechanic need to allow you to change every little detail and make the game completely non-linear in order to be considered "time travel"? The game allows you to go to several different time periods of the same overworld, and certain decisions you make in each time affect how things you happen in the future. It has a time travel mechanic, stop being a fucking pedantic loser, holy shit.
It's the memorable characters and interesting story. Simple as that. The battle mechanics are simple and fun, but people remember the game because you can take a frog, a robot and a cavegirl into a post-apocalyptic future to save the world. Music and graphics are also top notch. Mystery solved, send me my check whenever you like.
>What makes Chrono Trigger so special?
After all the time spent on things like Final Fantasy and Lunar, where you basically shot through the game once and it was over, the New Game+ option (along with the multitude of extra endings) was appealing.
>Since when does a "time travel" mechanic need to allow you to change every little detail and make the game completely non-linear in order to be considered "time travel"?
What's the point of a so called time travel mechanic if I'm not even allowed to make any decision to modify the future? It's becomes an empty buzzword just like blast processing, there is no thing like actual time travel in CT, that's all.
>and certain decisions you make in each time affect how things you happen in the future.
There are no decisions other than letting the game continue, whenever you get to a point in which you could have decided something you were just being thrown in a mandatory fetch quest you couldn't refuse or change the outcome of, rendering the notion of time travel worthless.
Might as well say that FFVIII had time travel mechanics too at this point.
>stop being a fucking pedantic loser, holy shit.
Gratuitous insults don't make your arguments any better, grow up.
>There are no decisions other than letting the game continue
>What's the point of a so called time travel mechanic if I'm not even allowed to make any decision to modify the future?
Not him but JRPGs are virtually always pre-written stories that you play through. They're more like visual novels with combat than western RPGs that are more about exploration and experimentation. What you're complaining about is just basics of the genre.
>What's the point of a so called time travel mechanic if I'm not even allowed to make any decision to modify the future?
but you do have the ability to change some of it. which is still much better than none.
>there is no thing like actual time travel in CT, that's all.
You're wrong. Because there is. In your autistic mind, you have linked "time travel" with "open world, non-linear game that allows you to change any detail you want in any time period and have it affect the future". The thing is, the game DOES do that, just not on the stupidly complicated level that you feel it needs to in order to be validated as "actual" time travel. The game allows you to do things in the past that affect the future. It requires you to do these things. You come to a roadblock and you, the player, must deduce that perhaps there is something in the past that can be done to change your situation. It's up to you to manually go to that time period and solve whatever problem exists there and return to the future to see the result of your actions. That's a time travel mechanic. I'm sorry it doesn't fit your autistic definition.
I feel like you would argue that Super Mario Bros. doesn't have a jumping mechanic because the game forces you to jump over pits and enemies in a linear fashion, therefor, somehow, the mechanic is invalidated.
>(I'm writing an article on the history of video games for a website.)
You don't sound qualified to write an article on the history of video games in any way. If you don't even understand why Chrono Tigger is revered, you should be reading them, not writing them.
>Not him but JRPGs are virtually always pre-written stories that you play throug
Just like every game?
Are you seriously implying that Bard's Tale, Wizardry or any TES aren't prewritten stories that you play through?
>Visual novels with combat
You don't know shit about the "basics" of the genre, stop parroting the garbage you see on the internet and play the goddamn games before perpetrating this endless cycle of misinformations.
Do you think western RPGs are all like Mass Effect or Dragon Age too?
>but you do have the ability to change some of it.
The only actual case in which you can do something that isn't mandatory is Cyrus' quest and a few other minor fetch quests, which do not change anything in the game besides giving you an item.
The only thing you're given a choice which can somehow influence the game's ending is killing Magus or ending the game by fighting Lavos at a few checkpoints throughout the game, which doesn't really amount to anything.
You're retarded if you think that a narrative gimmick amounts to an actual concrete, usable mechanic coded into the game, and you're even more retarded to think that the Mario example you illustrated makes any logical sense.
The game only allows you to go forward or end the game at a checkpoint, there is no other choice to be made, period.
Compare it to a game like Shadow of Memories, that has actual, functional time travel mechanic with events that happen dynamically in real time, that is time travel, not having to go around three separate maps fetching items and triggering a few mandatory linear events.
>Just like every game?
JRPGs tend to me more railroady than WRPGs. This isn't even a debate. Also it's completely besides the point. Which is that JRPGs as a rule are. So expecting Chrono Trigger to completely break convention giving you incredible control over it's time traveling mechanic is a pretty stupid assumption.
This. Why the fuck are you writing an article on the history of video games when you know fuck all in the first place?
>You're retarded if you think that a narrative gimmick amounts to an actual concrete, usable mechanic coded into the game
But it is. You have a time machine. You can get in it and travel to multiple time periods at your leisure. The things you can do are limited by the story line, but it HAS a time travel mechanic. You're just a sperglord with a rigid definition of "time travel mechanic" that nobody but you thinks is important. The game has multiple time periods and lets you swap between them. It has a time travel mechanic.
Based on your logic, I could totally make the argument that jumping in Mario is a "narrative gimmick". You need to do it to progress, and you need to do it on the game's terms. Therefor, you're not truly "jumping".
It's not the best of course, but crowning something or putting something on the top 1 spot over hundreds or thousands of others is stupid. Measuring things is only possible if the things we measure share the same quality we wish to examine. Putting any Zelda game in the same ring with CT is unreasonable.
What CT did well? It is polished. It does not have a billion characters, mindless grinding etc. There is story, but not too much. They won't make you read a novel about the history of their kingdom, but they will put an old man in the crowd who will say one or two things about some war that happened ages ago. There are serious moments, but not too much, so the drama does not become comedic after a while. However thanks to this, for many it could be an easy game, since it lacks depth. Both in story and gameplay. For me, it was a good experience, and I think it if I would introduce anyone to JRPGs I would make them play this.
What I'm trying to say, is that the developers objectively made a good game. They made it clear what they want to achieve, and reached that goal.
>The only thing you're given a choice which can somehow influence the game's ending is killing Magus or ending the game by fighting Lavos at a few checkpoints throughout the game, which doesn't really amount to anything.
>but there is
>but those aren't
>JRPGs tend to me more railroady than WRPGs. This isn't even a debate.
WRPGs only started to become a bit open around the early mid 90s. back in the 80's you had Wizardry or Bard's Tale which were pretty much railroads just like JRPGs, the only difference was that the story was not as important, there is virtually no difference between Wizardry up to 5 and arguably 6 and any japanese Wizardry clone or DQ/FF in terms of progression, except that the western counterparts had a slightly less forced progression for some things allowing you to skip some steps towards the final boss of the game.
Metal Max for the NES came out in 1991 and was one of the earliest example of sandboxes on consoles, if not the earliest, Langrisser/Warsong gave you tons of alternate routes for its time, the Romancing SaGa series also tried to mesh sandbox gameplay with traditional storytelling and a free quest structure and progression etc, much like the west did it with Ultima and a lot of other series.
>but it HAS a time travel mechanic.
Which I can't use besides swapping between four different overworlds, much like having four overworlds in FFIV, great stuff.
>Based on your logic, I could totally make the argument that jumping in Mario is a "narrative gimmick"
No. Jumping in Mario isn't a narrative gimmick because it serves its only actual purpose, which is to platform, while time travelling in CT only makes me swap maps an nothing more, it's exactly the same thing as using the submarine in FFV or the Space Whale in FFIV, it brings me to a different map which has no effect on the cause effect of the story besides again, continuing a linear series of scripts I have no control over.
Killing Magus doesn't involve time travel, I can't decide to not kill him for the moment and time travel to do it later, I can't decide to kill him and bring him back to life either, and the Lavos case isn't either, the only "true" example of time travel is Cyrus' quest.
>WRPGs only started to become a bit open around the early mid 90s.
The JRPG genre was distinct from WRPGs by the time Chrono Trigger was made. But that's completely beside the point.
Please tell us what website you're writing this article for so I can make sure to never ever visit it. You have no business trying to talk about video game history.
I'm not OP though.
And even then, it's useless to make this charade if you can't keep up your game.
As you are now you only give the impression you can't make a rebuttal, hide behind your mask of superiority all you want but until you bring something to the discussion you're irrelevant.
Do some actual research. I'm not rebutting you because it's not worth my time to explain the differences between the genres to someone who doesn't know. Also I don't care if you believe me or not.
This whole thing started as a side comment to OP's complaint that CT was too linear anyways. It's not even really relevant to the discussion.
Most of those were simple fetch quest with hardly any actual effect over the future, although they were usually well planned.
Cyrus' quest was one of those where you kind of had more agency even though the basis was kind of the same, as in instead of fetching an item you had to talk to the right NPCs to rebuild the castle in order to get to Cyrus' ghost.
>I'm not rebutting you because it's not worth my time to explain the differences between the genres to someone who doesn't know.
Or maybe you're the one who doesn't know about the differences, oh wise master of RPGs.
OP here. Wow. This thread really took off.
You're right about the time traveling. I still think it's "cool," but ultimately it's all smoke and mirrors. It's a gimmick at best. It follows a linear storyline, although I still wouldn't call it awful. But if time traveling is what makes Chrono Trigger so great, then sadly, it's main attraction falls flat on its face.
The gameplay in Super Mario RPG, Breath of Fire III, and Final Fantasy 6 don't make Chrono Trigger less good; my question was what makes Chrono Trigger better. And yes, Chrono Trigger does beat out Final Fantasy 6 and Super Mario RPG in most polls; I would know having conducted several of them.
Good description. And I feel the same way; memorable characters and locations. The soundtracks is amazing; I won't argue that. But the graphics could have used some touch ups.
Another example of how someone can bring up any classic RPG and mention something cool it offered that's just as good as Chrono Trigger.
>Please tell us what website you're writing this article for so I can make sure to never ever visit it.
Uh... that's not me, dude.
But couldn't the same be said about many other retro RPGs?
I don't think Chrono Trigger holds up. I own five PVC figures of Chrono Trigger that I paid over $300 for. And I love the soundtrack.
Putting all nostalgia aside, and looking at this game from a logical point of view, I still don't understand why it gets held in higher regards than other retro RPGs. Fun little game, but anyone would have a hard time explaining to the modern gamer what makes it so great.
Because I'm not trying to shitpost. I made an offhand comment about JRPGs being linear and it's spiraled out into someone demanding that I detail all the differences between WRPGs and JRPGs for them. Not wanting to have to explain genre definitions to someone is hardly shitpostingl.
>I don't think Chrono Trigger holds up. I own five PVC figures of Chrono Trigger that I paid over $300 for. And I love the soundtrack.
>Putting all nostalgia aside, and looking at this game from a logical point of view, I still don't understand why it gets held in higher regards than other retro RPGs. Fun little game, but anyone would have a hard time explaining to the modern gamer what makes it so great.
now try doing the same with Earthbound.
>I made an offhand comment about JRPGs being linear and it's spiraled out into someone demanding that I detail all the differences between WRPGs and JRPGs for them.
And you've been presented vast argument detailing how wrong you are.
>Not wanting to have to explain genre definitions to someone is hardly shitpostingl.
It is, you're literally throwing a stone and hiding your hand after being called out.
>It is, you're literally throwing a stone and hiding your hand after being called out.
lol whatever. If you don't want to look up why there are two separate RPG subgenres with distinct names, it's not my problem. But I'm not sitting here and typing out a history lesson for you.
If you don't believe me, then I'm 100% fine with that.
Marle is the most useless character ever. Her purpose in the game is lost way before the halfway point.
>now try doing the same with Earthbound.
I guess Earthbound is a different matter.
Earthbound has in fact a slightly different setting and premise than the average RPG, while it is mechanically a very standardized product even for its time.
Chrono Trigger was the usual fantasy RPG with time travel packed in, which was in terms of narrative pretty well done even for its time, but again, it was mechanically largely unimpressive, arguably one of the best technical efforts from Square in terms of overall presentation, but still a fairly cookie cutter game when it comes to gameplay.
What I can't fathom is how it got such a distorted fame when it comes to being different from other games, it wasn't even one of the points of the game as far as I know. Not like I justify Earthbound fans saying how totally different their game is, but I can at least kind of understand that due to the setting and premise being kind of unusual for the genre.
>If you don't want to look up why there are two separate RPG subgenres with distinct names, it's not my problem.
Neither is mine since I refute that "definition" in case you still didn't get this simple fact, and since as I suspected and affirmed, you simply parrot other people's opinion without having actually played the games and seen how the genres are for yourself only make me even more right, but at least this post of yours is the clear, definite ending to this argument.
I didn't like Earthbound though.
It's a tedious slog with mildly annoying humour and a few empty moral lessons shoved in, but I can kind of see why people say that it's "different", though again I do not agree with them.
Sweet opinion bro.
"Mother was a videogame. Dragon Quest continues to be a videogame even today. It wasn't until Metal Gear Solid 2 that a videogame stood up and said, 'Hey, this is a videogame', and when it did that, a hell of a lot of people were annoyed. Mother 2 lets you know that it knows you're playing it as a videogame. The more engrossed player will detect..."
I stopped reading.
Look, I know video games are in a "hey look we can break the fourth wall!" phase right now that other mediums dealt with 100 years ago and people are giving undue praise to any game that shows any degree of self-awareness, I get that. I can see why a critic going down that path again might turn someone off. But it is an enjoyable essay that's worth reading.
If that wasn't your reason for stopping, what was?
Just to be perfectly clear, I'm not interested in games in terms of narrative, and while I'm only halfway in it seems to me the guy is overly analitical of the game and is really making a huge philosophical and literary wank over nothing.
Earthbound fails to entertain me in terms of mechanics, and the rest doesn't help me appreciate it either it just isn't what I like and no apology or analytical essay will change the fact that it's a mechanically bland and forgettable game.
Not to mention that the writer is terribly ignorant, for instance:
>As a game, Mother 2 isn't much of a game. It's a Dragon Quest clone with a few sharp ideas that were never pursued further in other games, perhaps because there haven't been any other Mother games. For example, you can see your enemies on the world map as you walk around.
Romancing SaGa already did that years before.
He makes a few interesting points but most of them are very questionable and even those which I agree with aren't of any interest to me and cannot redeem the game for me.
That's not me though, champ.
Chrono Trigger is a game that will and has captured the imagination of many children, though as other more nitpicky anons have demonstrated has flaws and is surpassed by other games. I think it's important to consider the intended audience when discussing these things though.
CT is great because it's really no-nonsense.
>No random battles
Makes the game a lot more playable, and replayable because you're not slogging through encounters every 5 steps
>Great EXP and Money Curve
If you fight the battles as they come, you're always adequately prepared for the next ones, and you can often afford gear at the next shop.
I think this is what so many JRPG's do wrong. It's why people feel they're just grindy. If you go from directly from A to B you're rarely prepared for the next set of challenges.
>Short length, with a tight, focused narrative.
Everything you're doing post-first trip to the Future is directly related to the endgame: Killing Lavos.
Some of what you're doing can feel like going on tangents, but it's never on the level of something like Lufia, Dragon Quest, Xenogears, or Final Fantasy. It all is related to your end game, and you're known what the end game is early on.
All of the sidequests are directly related to a character in your party getting more development and their final equipment. It's a great way to do it, and they're all pretty interesting and engaging.
Is it over rated? Of course. Every game that gets cited as best game ever is over rated. Ocarina of Time, FF7, Chrono Trigger, are all flawed, but they're still amazing game.
It was a team up between the creators of Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest, the two biggest RPGs of the time, plus with character designs by Akira Toriyama who did Dragonball and Dragon Quest.
Basically they got the people who made the 3 most popular things in Japan of all times, and got them to make a game together.
On top of that, the game was lots of fun too. Not grindy, not difficult, had neat combinations and power-ups, a nice cast, GREAT graphics for the SNES, good music, okay story, and the time travel mechanic gave you multiple overworlds and a setting that was complex in a unique way.
So basically it ,
- looked good
- sounded good
- played good
- had a good storyline
- had a unique setting and unique twists
- was made by the most influential game makers in japan
The last point is only a big deal in Japan, where the game would've sold big on that alone.
>(Beating out games like Super Metroid and A Link to the Past even.)
And rightly so. Those games are judged a lot retroactively based on their sequels, which is the same reason why people shit on the Genesis Sonic games nowadays.
>Previous research — also conducted by Mazurek — found that boys with autism who played role-playing video games displayed more oppositional behaviors like arguing. But it was unclear whether the games were sparking the problems or if children with behavior troubles were drawn to the genre.
A lot of things about it were very new at the time. I'm not saying they were necessarily unprecedented, but as someone who played most rpgs from around that time period, some things stuck out to me:
1) I don't think I had ever seen dual or triple techs in an rpg before then. It wasn't a really deep system, but it was more than we had.
2) A lot of the battles had a strategic element. Before then it was typically "monster stands on the left, you stand on the right, you spam attacks at each other." There was some degree of geography in Chrono Trigger, and many battles required some thought. Magus and the Mammon Machine both required use of the Masamune, and in the former case, particular spells. Golems mirrored attacks at you. Dinosaur in past weakened when hit with lightning, but eventually used it as a super move. Skeleton in desert only became vulnerable when struck with water. In the case of the Mammon Machine and Golems, it required some sidequesting to take full advantage of the strategies (power up Masamune or get elemental resistant equipment). I know that even now there are people who get into the game that struggle with some of those encounters.
3) Time travel just made the game really unique. The world was very small, but you dealt with it in different periods. It gave it a real vertical versus horizontal feel. What you did in the past affected the future, whether it was reforesting a continent or emptying a treasure chest. That was a far cry from guy in first town saying same damn thing all game.
Having first played it years later when it was re-released for PS1, I don't think it lived up to the hype. It was okay during the first playthrough, but I didn't care enough for the setting or the characters to continue with the New Game+ mode.
On the other hand, I did enjoy Chrono Cross quite a bit, despite the game having so many odd ends.
That's not how time traveling works anon.
Say tomorrow you made a time machine and went back to the year 1943 to kill hitler. 1943 has already happened and you were already there and killed hitler. Shits not going to magically change in the present.
You can't change the past, either you were there and affected it or you werent.
Best game of all time.
After FFVI (back in 1994) you didn't think it could get any better, but then this beast came out.
>no random encounters (nothing against random encounter, but this created a best of all worlds scenario)
>great time travel storyline
>amazing graphics for the time
>great characters (though the game lacks some character development)
It's sad that I will never play CT again for the first time.
A big problem is that a lot of what drew gamers to it (no random encounters, combination attacks, multiple endings, maybe even time travel) are now old hat. It's still fun, but it can be hard for someone who only played the DS version to truly comprehend how amazing it was on release.
I try to play this every year, but I always end up dropping it when I go into the future and drive around in the mode 7 area.
I just don't find the game fun. I keep trying to give it a chance but it's never clicked with me.
just look at these 3 smooth fuckers
When you look at non-Japanese RPGs Chrono trigger's strength is that it is very pretty and has a great sound track. Or even if you look at some of the japanese rpgs with more complex character making, combat or dungeons.
Anyone that honestly thinks it's one of the best RPGS are even in the top 30 is someone that does not care at all about the depth of video games.
Consider that the game was released in a time when PC gaming was still somewhat exclusive and it's primary audience were console RPGS. Remember that at this time final fantasy 5 was considered 'too complicated' for Westerners to handle.
Time traveling into the past is impossible from the get go, so it's no more strange to be able to go back and kill Hitler than it is being able to go back but not be able to kill Hitler.
It's an imaginary scenario either way, it's just what you imagine may happen to time if you tried to create a paradox.
Well it fundamentally isn't, but imagining a scenario or writing a story where a time machine was built that was linked to when it was invented would be an interesting hook and avoid paradoxes.
This game is pure cancer. Just play any final fantasy game over it, especially 7.
7 has a complex story, well written characters, challenging gameplay, and significantly longer. I don't have to wait in unskippable cutscenes in 7 to begin the story and fighting.
>I don't have to wait in unskippable cutscenes in 7 to begin the story and fighting.
VII literally opens with a cutscene you can't skip.
In CT, you want to start the story and shit? lol, you have to wait for marle to get candy and wait out that stupid demonstration. In 7, you're in battle the moment you see your character
Marle getting the candy IS the story, you twit. It's a JRPG. If all you want to do is be in combat why are you playing an RPG in the first place?
I like VII more than CT any day, but you're being an ubertard.
The bullshit millennial fair was just filler to make the game feel longer than it really was.
The gameplay is the most important part and CT would rather have me watch cutscenes than play the game and get into battles like an RPG is supposed to be
>Actually playing JRPGs for the gameplay
JRPGs are my favourite genre and I've yet to play one that has good gameplay, you play them for the story, graphics and sound. If you consider gameplay the most important part of JRPGs then perhaps you should look into the strategic ones like FF Tactics - turn-based/ATB ones are clearly not for you.
>JRPGs are my favourite genre and I've yet to play one that has good gameplay, you play them for the story, graphics and sound.
Maybe if you stopped being a faggot and actually played good JRPGs instead of interactive books you could have an opinion on that matter, but no, you keep spouting /v/ tier shit.
>The bullshit millennial fair was just filler to make the game feel longer than it really was.
That's literally what the bulk of the game is, walking around talking to people.
> instead of interactive books
By the time CT came along, the JRPG genre was heavily in this vein. FFVII is really no different and neither have combat that actually requires any strategy.
If you want to play JRPGs for the combat then go ahead, but you're one of very few out there and your opinion is pretty irrelevant.
lol it's probably not even in the upper half of the Final Fantasies. It would be much better with a more interesting system than Materia. All your characters end up feeling generic in battle outside of their limits and most of those aren't anything special.
Also it's way too easy to become retardedly overpowered. In my first playthrough I killed Sephiroth by accident before getting to see Supernova I'd heard so much about. In my second playthrough I had Cloud equipped with Cover and Counter Attack Materia so he countered everything for almost as much damage as Knights of the Round. And forgot to take it off before going into the Seph fight, so I spent the whole time having my party throw Megalixers at him to keep him alive long enough to finally cast Supernova.
FFVII is a good game, but calling it a masterpiece is pretty laughable.
Metal Max or any SaGa game are your go to if you want good gameplay.
Metal Max it's especially good because it doesn't require you to grind at all, you can easily massacre the final boss at level 25-ish if you know what you're doing with your character, even lower if you want to challenge yourself, it's also a sandbox game with almost no limits regarding exploration and it's extremely satisfying to play and find new way to exploit stuff.
SaGa doesn't have much for story, with some notable exceptions, but has the most satisfying turn based gameplay and general battle system if you like depth and general experimental systems, but the series is mostly gameplay for the sake of gameplay, so it can be a bit obtuse for newcomers.
Both have good graphics and exceptional music.
Just to make a few examples:
>FFVII is really no different and neither have combat that actually requires any strategy.
Yes, go tell that guy, I'm not him.
>but you're one of very few out there and your opinion is pretty irrelevant.
As if I care about the "popular opinion", the vast majority of people praises trash as it was the second coming of Christ, the popular opinion matters less than nothing, otherwise we should think that garbage like Skyrim or Mass Effect are masterpieces like people want you to think.
>As if I care about the "popular opinion",
It wasn't anything to do with popular opinions. I thought I was talking to the guy who likes FFVII over CT because CT has too much talking and story segments. My point was someone playing a JPRG and complaining about too much story is expecting the wrong thing from the JRPG genre, so any opinion they have on it would be kind of worthless.
You're welcome, if you want to try something else check out Dark Law, it has a decent english patch.
There's also other stuff you could try, but you'll need moonrunes as it's JP only, like Lunatic Dawn, that's another pretty good series with lots of variety and satisfying gameplay, but it's more western oriented in terms of battle design, Starlight&Prairie is also a pretty fun RPG that is kind of reminiscent of SaGa, albeit more simplified, but that too is JP only, same with S-rpg like Bounty Sword.
The problem is that when people think about JRPG they think in DQ or FF terms, mostly because those are the titles that dominated the western market, so it's kind of understandable.
However, there always was a style of games with minimal story investment and more gameplay, even within Square who created the SaGa series, which is the exact opposite of FF in terms of design, Enix has some examples of that too, Mystic Arc for instance manages to tell a simple story with minimal cutscenes, though you do have to talk to a lot of NPCs in certain sections and feel too reminiscent of DQ, most Ascii Corp RPGs are like that too, Wizap and Dark Law have minimal amount of text compared to raw gameplay, even Solid Runner which is heavily story based for the Ascii standard still has much less cutscene and story exposition than the average RPG.
Let's just say it's a complex environment, saying that all JRPGs are visual novels with some combat is like saying that WRPGs are all dating sims with combat, it's a meaningless statement, they're all RPGs at the end of the days and both try to break out of their respective "conventions".
They're both subgenre of RPG, which is why we have the terms JRPG and W/CRPG. Your post is literally a complaint about how JRPGs aren't like the WRPGs you like. I'm just pointing it out so you don't waste your time trying to play games in a genre you don't like.
It's true that the genres blend somewhat, but in general JRPGs are a distinct genre from their western counterparts.
I want to make a game where Square Enix gets killed, to really get the message across they should make good games like Trigger instead of crap like FFXIII. Anybody know how I could get around copyright?
Yes, a good game, but there's no denying the second half is pretty horrible.
There shouldn't be one good RPG game every 7 years, you know. The last good one before Bravely Default was TWEWY, and that came out in '07
I think the Etrian Odyssey games blow most retro JRPGs out of the water, but they're also more dungeon crawlers than real RPGs. Legend of Legacy was pretty good too.
I think in general most long running series have become slowly worse over time though. Even the SMTs these days are kind of simple compared to the older ones. Soul Hackers was a hell of a lot more interesting combat wise than IV or SG were.
Etrian Odyssey's stories are absolutely horrible. They got the battle skills down pat, but plot? Not even close to other JRPG's.
I just want the good old games where it was like reading a good book, you know?
>I just want the good old games where it was like reading a good book, you know?
I think the problem is that we grew up and learned to appreciate better books, but JRPGs never did. FFVI was a good story when I was 14 because I'd barely experienced anything like that before. But now it's cliched and horribly told compared to what I'm used to reading.
>Time traveling doesn't DO anything
Are y'all niggas retarded
Time Traveling wasn't "here's YOUR ability to remake history as YOU want" as a gameplay feature or some dumb shit that'd be severely underwhelming if done today(i.e. Skyrim's civil war.)
Time Traveling was a UNIQUE NARRATIVE DEVICE. Especially at the time when many gamers knowledge of JRPGs was Final Fantasy and Secret of Mana.
Time Travel told you of the threat of Lavos by allowing you to witness the before and after and setting a unique stage to intercede and prevent the actual event. It led you to a chance to see how Lavos' power created a unique era and the end of that era. Even the cave man era lets you witness Lavos' arrival. It let you follow Frog's story and face Magus, then learn how Magus came to be at all. It let you meet Robo and Ayla at all.
Time Travel added some other unique exploration options(finding Magus' goons, the Sun Palace, etc) and considering the game's ultimate dungeon takes place in a floating death fortress that can only exist by virtue of your time travel...
Like god damn dudes. "It's all smokes and mirrors, it's a gimmick, the storyline is LINEAR." No shit! The linearity is a STRENGTH! Hope you reflect on this a bit before that article, dude.
First let's try not to go backwards, and then we could go forwards. I didn't expect the games to be great back then, since it was a new development. I sort of figured that when things got comfortable they'd fix all the errors and make things more serious.
I think in many cases things did get better. But I look at FFIV as a dark point that set an unfortunate trend for JRPGs that focused on story at the expense giving the player options.
It's amazing how every week i discover a new JRPG for the SFC. Also it seems to be a sequel of another one called Soul & Sword.
There's even a translation of this?
>but in general JRPGs are a distinct genre from their western counterparts.
How? What makes a JRPG a JRPG? They were heavily influenced by both Ultima and Wizardry and included many mechanics from either series. What defines a JRPG with its battle, character growth, story progression, and out of battle mechanics?
Heck, a lot of the mechanics might be similar to the same as their western counter parts, I mean that is what inspired them after all.
>What defines a JRPG with its battle, character growth, story progression, and out of battle mechanics?
And such things are virtually indistinguishable from WRPGS.
Character Growth: Final Fantasy 1 uses a DnD spells per day system and has it's stat mechancis directly from DnD.
Out of Battle Mechanics: Again derivative of Western Wrpgs. Going to town, getting information and than going to a dungeon to fetch some item is straight out of DnD and stuff like Ultima.
Battle: The truely japanese battle system is the SRPG, with Fire Emblem setting the stage. The battle systems associated with JRPGs are western. FF and Dragon Quest borrow from Wizardry.
Story: What truely seperates Japanese stories from Western stories is the blending of scifi and fantasy. Phantasy star was the first to do this in large scale. Contrary to what people say anime is part of japanese stories, early FF and Dragon quest are far closer to western style stories than anime.
>They were heavily influenced by both Ultima and Wizardry
Genres evolve dipshit they all came from ultima, wizardy and d&d (FF in particular) then became their own genre over time. That's the fucking point. How fucking young are you?
Do you understand what genre or subgenre means you mongs? Nobody outside militant westabo redditors who need to prove faux superiority of western rpgs uses JRPG as a name for the genre. People call arpgs, dungeon crawlers, srpgs and draqon quest clones JRPGs because, guess what, they are all rpgs from Japan.
>Nobody outside militant westabo redditors who need to prove faux superiority of western rpgs uses JRPG as a name for the genre.
I honestly can't tell if you're a troll, a 13 year old or just a complete idiot, but either way you're hilariously out of touch.
>People still arguing about "genre differences" in JRPG and WRPG
>People calling out each other over bullshit
You'd think grown men would have more reading comprehension and common sense than all those kids and manchildren on /v/, guess I was very wrong.
It's not my job to answer questions this stupid for you. I already told you I'm not your history teacher. If you truly, honestly don't understand why the subgenre names exist and you're not going to bother looking into it yourself I'm not going to waste my time explaining it to you.
If you wanted to learn you could, what you really want to do is argue and I'm not interested in such a pointless discussion.
Exactly! I've just started playing Zoop after being really into Tetris for a while and it's like I'm playing the same game too. Not surprising, they belong to the genre puzzle after all.
How quaint, I too have recently started playing Deus Ex, it really plays a lot like Baldur's Gate down to all the little things, unsurprising since it's a RPG, or as many people would say, a
if you ask someone "what makes good vidya", they'll usually start listing things category by category. e.g. usually a list that looks something like "good gameplay, nice graphics, good music/atmospheric sound, smooth controls", etc
but the other thing that makes good vidya, to me, is how all those things work/come together, and in some cases doing several of those things well and coordinating among them can really help the "sum total" of those parts, transcend any individual part.
so what i'm basically saying is that to me, CT is one of the greatest of all time because it is solid on all the key parts of vidya (from/relative to that era, at least) and creates a finished product that was just miles ahead of so much other content of the time.
sorry if it seems like i'm rambling but i'm not sure how else i would describe my opinion of it.
I'll just ask in here instead of starting a new thread.
What are some "advanced" or more difficult JRPGs?
I feel like I've only really played the casual and mainstream ones.
>Mario RPG/Paper Mario
>Legend of Legaia
>Legend of Dragoon
>Breath of Fire 1-3
Looking for games that are harder. Not necessarily harder in that theres grinding or whatever, I want more advanced mechanics like Junction from FF8 or an interesting battle system.
Should I just try something like Valkyrie Profile next? or is Lunar a good start. People have also recommended me Dragon Quarter but I don't know if thats a more srpg or jrpg.
That's why I picked it for you, special friend. I don't know what makes you parade around your ignorance like it's a badge of honor and loudly announce how little you know about gaming history, but good old Chris is how I imagine you probably look.
The SaGa series due to its non-traditional mechanics. Outside of Final Fantasy Legend III they don't use an experience point and level up system so you have to either get involved with the racial character growth mechanics to having natural character growth progression. Even with natural character growth it isn't as simple as killing enemies with the same skills over and over again to become stronger due to later installments doing things like having the best stat gains come from stronger foes while weaker enemies that you previously fought will net you little to no stat boosts or skills being learned during combat along with "progressing" the games battle rank which can increase the difficulty of the encounters even if your party isn't prepared to face such enemies. So in CERTAIN installments you cannot do the standard run around the town and grind to gain levels and money before you head out due to it being counter productive in the long run.
I tried playing this on emulator about 12 years ago when I realized I had missed the boat with it as a kid. I got to the cave-woman and the rom shit the bed. I wasn't that into it anyway, so I never tried again. I just couldn't get into it.
>all this hatred for random encounters
I think he's referring to the fact that the second half of Chrono Trigger and FFVI are more open ended, simply giving the player the end-goal and a list of side quests that give powerful reward items.
It's still dumb to say that makes it a collectathon though.
Yeah thinking about it I came to that conclusion as well, but collectathon is a terrible description for that. Also it's not unique to VI and CT, many JRPGs open up like that right at the end and let you either head straight for the boss or do sidequests.
You can get some ps1 jrpgs like ff7 for relatively cheap. As a fellow yuropoor though, if you want snes jrpgs you may as well give up. Either emulate, get a flashcart or learn Japanese. I'm doing a mix of all 3.
How are flashcards even more expensive? £70 for every SNES RPG except Star Ocean and Super Mario RPG, or £40+ each. You do the maths.
If flashcarts, emulation, and learning Japanese are out of the question (all understandable for various reasons), then I'm sorry, you should just give up. Almost no decent JRPGs even came out in Europe, and the few that did (Terranigma, Illusion of Time/Gaia, a few others) are very expensive. You can get the German version of Illusion of Time for relatively cheap (like £20 or something, last time I checked?) but the English one is expensive.
Better have money to claim Fair Use; they'll drag your ass to court literally just to say that and have the judge toss the case.
It's not about...money...it's about making an...example...
Extremely overrated, just like it's other "best JRPG ever" cousin FF7. They're good, don't get me wrong, but fuck me do some of the gameplay and story stuff get on my nerves.
the characters are boring.
I've had the itch to replay this game recently. I've never actually beaten it, just gotten to the end and never finished it. Twice, actually.
Now feels like the time for me to complete this game. It's definitely one of my favorites of all time, and I've never seen a single ending. Sad, isn't it?
So my question is this: what is the best, comfiest way to play through this game? Emulating on my computer seems kinda bland. Getting it on the DS? Sitting on my couch, and playing the PSN version that you can download? I never had an actual SNES, so I've just been emulating it / had it on the Wii VC, so I'll never know the joy of playing it the way it was originally intended, but I just want to play a comfy game in a comfy way.
I have a tendency of getting to the end of JRPGs and then dropping them before the end boss/dungeon. For some reason once I get to the end of exploring I lose all interest and just seeing the story end isn't interesting in itself.
If you have a DS, then I would say that's the best way to play it now.
I am bad for that too, in recent memory i got to the last djngeon then dropped persona q and dragon quest nine. When i was a kid i did that tl like every final vantasy game, had to gk back and finish them years later.
i used to do this as well.
for me the reason was that a lot of games back then (especially rpgs) had no post game and i didnt want to be done with it just yet. felt like a close friend was moving away
>i didnt want to be done with it just yet. felt like a close friend was moving away
I'm like this. Never finished Wind Waker for that very reason. I just loved it so much I never wanted it to end. Went through the final dungeon, right up to Ganon and then turn around and just chill in the world.
Surprisingly however, it wasn't that common before these games. Many games in the first half of the SNES era had very barebone endgame and postgame. FFVI had a veritable ton (although you could see the trend with FFV, FFIV didn't have a whole lot of them tho, most of the endgame stuff was in the final dungeon in the original release). CT has a lot of stuff, I could cite Tales of Phantasia for having a good amount of sidequests, but there really aren't that many examples. Heck, if you think about it, the same is true for strong optional bosses and superbosses, they just weren't a thing back then. An example is Illusion of Gaia/Time. The game had one optional dungeon, with one optional boss (you could say a superboss, he is probably the strongest in fact), coming from what is basically the one sidequest in the game, that spans the whole game. It doesn't really open up in the end or towards the end, however.
Earthbound is all about the enviroments, music and the world. It's basically a fun "walking simulator" with battles. If you're just looking at mechanics then no wonder you don't appreciate it.
>Surprisingly however, it wasn't that common before these games
Nor after those games. Usually the only ones that kept like that were already established series before Final Fantasy VI.
It became somewhat common after that. Then 'postgames' started popping up all over the place. The first game with a proper postgame I can think of is Lunar 2, although I'm not sure it's the first one. First NG+ of sorts is probably Lufia, but I could be wrong here too. In a sense, the amount of sidequests that open up in FFVI and CT before the end IS kinda unique for its age, although another example would be Live-A-Live.