FF6 and Romancing SaGa 3

FF4 was released in 91, RS1 came one year later, and despite being pretty different mechanics wise it kinda gives this vibe of a really advanced FF4 romhack.

Since both games were devolped by Square it stands to reason that there might some overlap in the teams, the lead designer did work on the first two FF games after all, but Im finding it hard to find more information on the subject.

what do you think anons?

you didn't play romancing saga did you

>>4153014

you know, after checking some screenshots they do look similar to each other too, I did not think about that since I only played the GBA version of FF4 and that has its own look

>>4153012
Shared art teams and similar sound effects.

>>4153028
Probably the same/similar engines, too.

>>4153028

if I finish RS3 I might look into the tilesets and see if they reused or repurposed any assets between projects, could be a nice bit of trivia

File: Big Boss and Ocelot circa 1984 Afganistan.jpg (37KB, 620x372px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 620x372px

>Design teams may share assets

Gee fucking wizz

File: music-meister-batman-the-brave-and-the-bold-0_25.jpg (13KB, 210x240px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 210x240px

>>4153037
>MFW I first heard that FF6 wind sound effect played in Chrono trigger

>>4153012
According to mobygames, 11 people who worked on RS3 also worked on FF6.

>>4153012
>and despite being pretty different mechanics wise it kinda gives this vibe of a really advanced FF6 romhack.
wat

I've played the Game Boy trilogy but not the SNES trilogy for obvious reasons, but I'm interested in them.

I'm a little discouraged by the fact Japanese reviews seemed pretty lukewarm at the time, and the Western reviews of the PS2 remake kind of shat all over it.

Is that just Western reviewers being casuals who hate JRPGs? Because I always thought the SNES games were considered classics in Japan.

>>4154645
Just play them. These aren't the kind of RPGs that take a million hours to get into, they're pretty quick to throw you into things.

>>4153014
RS1 is the anti FF, radical freedom

>>4154645
>Is that just Western reviewers being casuals who hate JRPGs?

No, it's that the games needlessly complicate what should otherwise be streamlined battles by forcing you to work with complex or highly experimental design choices. In some games, random battles take several minutes to resolve, and occur with such overwhelming frequency that it deters you from actually exploring your surroundings. RS1 is terrible about this. Later games span the enemies out a little more so you have a fairer chance of slipping by without having to fight a marathon of 20+ battles one right after the other.

I'm not shitting on the games. On the contrary, I've played and completed most of them. But I'm not going to claim that Kawazu's design philosophies are completely infallible and anyone who thinks otherwise is just a casual scrub. SaGa games might leave a bad taste in your mouth, unless marathoning random encounters and fiddling with convoluted skill systems is something you're explicitly looking for in an RPG. I can certainly see how review sites might have panned the series, considering the need for reviews to appeal to a larger audience. SaGa is incredibly niche at that.

Also, steer clear of the general here on /vr/. I'm reluctant to go into great detail about why you should take my advice, but a quick review of the thread should be more than enough to deter any participation.

>>4154669
Some good advice I saw for RS1 is to play with a small amount of characters rather than maxing out your party. You have less messing around with rows when you get ambushed and less commands to input in battle. Due to the way stat upgrades work in RS, it doesn't even make you that much weaker overall.