Comments on: Is a Game Bad Just Because It’s Different?

By: duckofindeed

duckofindeed — Wed, 24 Jul 2013 22:17:10 +0000

For me, the smaller amount of flexibility in terms of moving around the locations wasn’t so bad, as “FFXII” was too open, and it was overwhelming (though, it was indeed a bit too inflexible). But, I certainly see why that would bother people. My only thing is, I understand people don’t like that aspect of the game, but is that a reason to dislike the entire game? Perhaps. Perhaps not. But, I do see all the limitations they built into “FFXIII”, with the game being linear, and the limited roles. Still a fun game, I thought, but it certainly had flaws, as did its sequel.

By: Hatm0nster

Hatm0nster — Wed, 24 Jul 2013 02:32:43 +0000

I’ve never cared much for change either, but if I try a game and it plays well, I’ll probably like it. I think I can clarify some of the contempt people have for FFXIII though. Where as many of the earlier FF games had freedom of movement (or the illusion of it) most of XIII felt like a series of straight hallways between cut-scenes and boss fights.

Then there were the roles, which also were limited right up until the final chapter. This was a problem because you weren’t able to make full use of the paradigm system until the limits on the roles were taken off. As for the battle system, I think people took issue with it because it made you feel more disconnected from the characters that usual, the fights felt more like something you were watching rather than something you were actively participating in.

Personally I liked the paradigm system, I thought directing the flow of the battle rather than performing every action was a cool idea, but that doesn’t completely make up for the other flaws.

They learned from their mistake though. XIII-2 had better combat, greater freedom of movement, and didn’t limit the system like the first one did. Now if only they had given it a decent story instead of that plot train-wreck they ended up going with.

By: duckofindeed

duckofindeed — Tue, 23 Jul 2013 20:17:55 +0000

Exactly right. A game should be judged on simply how good it is, not on if it is different from what we wanted. But yeah, like you, I want the 3D “Rayman” games back. “Origins” was good and all, but “Rayman” was best in his 3D days, I believe. (Oh, and those Rabbids…)

By: duckofindeed

duckofindeed — Tue, 23 Jul 2013 20:12:37 +0000

I completely agree. I may fight change, but if a game is done well, I’m fine with it. (I found “Super Mario Sunshine” and “Majora’s Mask” to be delightful.) And I understand games have to change. How fun would it be if each sequel was the same as all previous games? But, what was Rareware thinking with “Nuts and Bolts”?! Like you said, it would have been good if it wasn’t a “B-K” game. And “Paper Mario: Sticker Star” is bad for a “Paper Mario” game? Good thing I’m skipping it then.

By: Walters

Walters — Tue, 23 Jul 2013 04:39:32 +0000

Man, thinking a game is bad just because it’s different hurts my brain. It basically comes down to the game itself — are you good enough to overcome tradition, or are you so terrible that I’ll want to flush you down my toilet? It doesn’t get any simpler than that.

Side note: I do kind of wish Rayman returned to 3D adventure like and not as a side-scroller, as Rayman for the N64 was awesome (didn’t get a chance to play the GCN version). I also kind of wished he wasn’t pushed aside from the Rabbids for a time :(

By: ianrl1989

ianrl1989 — Mon, 22 Jul 2013 22:20:37 +0000

I tend to do the same: I’m generally not too open to change, unless it’s done correctly (ALA Mario Sunshine, Majora’s Mask, etc). A lot of developers fall into the pitfall of trying to making their games more unique by adding onto existing gameplays. Usually it just leads to more convoluted gameplay, but there are some games that really do add something new and interesting to the formula. Then there’s the games like Nuts and Bolts and Paper Mario:Sticker Star. Both are good games, but they’re bad sequels to franchises in which fans were starving for a new title. N&B is the worst offender; Rare was absolutely out of their mind for reviving a classic franchise only to make a game that couldn’t be farther from the originals. If the game wasn’t a Banjo-Kazooie title, players would have probably loved it, but it’s such a disappointment for those hoping for something closer to the original.