Baldur's Gate = Groundbreaking/Fallout = more of the same

Starseeker said:
If you missed my point, I didn't like FF7 that much. I just said FF7 was successful in sales.
I didn't miss it, if you were talking to me :P
 
GAH nononononononononononononono

Go with 3/6, ruined world was so much better than 7, that's when the Final Fantasy series went mainstream and they found the whiny boy main character formula for success.

Get yourself a good SNES emulator and find Final Fantasy 6, you won't be disappointed with the length and depth of story, or go with 5 for a far greater diversity in character development than 6 (however it has this nasty habit of putting in [Quest not completed] in the speech box when you're talking to someone if you didn't finish something instantly letting you know that you missed probably something extremely important that you can't go back and do).

FF 7 is the point where the final fantasy series lost it's soul to marketing.
 
Lost its soul to marketing?
hardly, they were making a statement with it. It was very very artistic and cinematic for a 3d console game.
ff6 attempted that, but the technical limitations of the snes were far below that of the playstation, although the maker of ff7 complained about the restrictive limitations of the playstation platform as well.
 
Morbus said:
5/5? No way! Fallout goes with 4.5/5 and Fallout 2 4/5, from MY perspective. Anyway, Baldur's Gate may have been groundbreaking, but that doesn't mean it's not boring and cliche and whatnot...

Well, if you're rating Fo1 higher than Fo2, then you're rating it on grounds other than RPGiness, and then you shouldn't be surprised if I rate BG higher than Fo1 for reasons that may or may not be similar. I can't say for sure I've had more enjoyment out of BG overall as it is, but if I hadn't got involved with the guide-making I'm absolutely sure I would have.
 
I'd rate FO1 higher than FO2 on RPGiness, FO2 might have more to do but much of it doesn't fit the setting. Breaking setting is as bad as forcing the player to make out of character choices.
 
Yes but that's ALL FF7 is, pretty, the main cast is emo squared and those that aren't emo suffer from a varying array of mental illnesses

The whole game just grates against me, especially with it's twofold popularity even now, it was the first 3d sprite RPG, granted, it had some moderate character development, granted, but as for plot development and story depth, and characters that don't want to cut their wrists every three seconds, it looses out significantly against 5 and 3/6.

Magitek and Kefka's laugh for the win!
 
Demonslayer said:
Stop saying bad things about Square and FF7 (and previous ones from the series) please :(

Umm, I'm for the earlier FFs but 7 and beyond is what I am railing against, and I mentioned before 9 had potential before they fell back into their formula, 12 tricked me into thinking that the main character wouldn't be whiny by killing off the guy you were playing in the beginning.

Tried to play 10, saw the whine and cheese being brought from the table a mile away, 8 was more of the same whine and cheese, but I never got to try out 11 so I can't say anything about this.

Now then I'll stop, I may not like it but I don't think I want to hurt / anger anyone further...

Btw, xdarkyrex, out of pure curiosity, have you played 5 or 3/6, heck even 2 (Sadly I can't remember the Japanese enumeration for Cecil's Final Fantasy)?

Once again, sorry to Demonslayer, I didn't mean to hurt your feelings. :silenced:
 
Per said:
Well, if you're rating Fo1 higher than Fo2, then you're rating it on grounds other than RPGiness, and then you shouldn't be surprised if I rate BG higher than Fo1 for reasons that may or may not be similar.
I rate Fo1 higher than Fo2 because, mostly, FO1 was out before Fo2... Which, in turn, AFAIK, was out before BG1. I think that has to be taken into consideration when rating old games... Also, Fallout 2 has lots of bugs and has those little cities like san fran and broken hills... You know...
 
requiem_for_a_starfury said:
I'd rate FO1 higher than FO2 on RPGiness, FO2 might have more to do but much of it doesn't fit the setting.

I call your RPGiness gauge into question! Anyway, Baldur's Gate is true to the setting and doesn't break the fourth wall. Wooo!
 
Well, I don't know what you're going for exactly, but if there are people who hate fourth wall breakage and people who love fourth wall breakage, a game can't be expected to please both groups.
 
Back
Top