Gaming Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles

[satan665]

This is sort of a rating and expression of disappointment with the new Gamecube Final Fantasy game.

I new it would be very different from the traditional FF games on playstation, but I didn't know hoe not fun it would be. I wish I had some gaming friends to try the multiplayer, maybe its more fun that way but there are still some serious problems with this game.

Gameplay: The gameplay is very much like the Mana series' (legend of Mana). Its super simplistic, and you have a charge up attack and some simple 3-move combos. Its real time so you have to run up yourself and hack away at bad guys. It feels really primitive. I end up doing a hit and run strategy with just about every enemy. The magic system is boring on 1P, and it usually takes too long to charge up a spell to be convenient. It seems like they put next to no effort in this at all.

Story: What story? All you do is collect water from special trees. There is no character personality in the playable characters. A few cut-scene things happened that were funny or a little interesting but not much.

Graphics: plain, nothing great. Garbage compared to Zelda or Metroid

I don't know how they made this, but from now on I'm going to avoid the hype and rent games more often. I still havent found a good magazine or source of reviews for GCN games, which is a problem.

[COLOR=Red]What do you all think? It seems like more of a kid-friendly game. Have you played the multiplayer?[/COLOR]

[Guest Reoken]

[COLOR=DarkRed][COLOR=DarkRed]did u c Nintendao power magazine???[/COLOR][/COLOR]

[Semjaza]

[quote name='Reoken][COLOR=DarkRed][COLOR=DarkRed]did u c Nintendao power magazine???[/COLOR'][/COLOR][/quote]

Whoa there, buddy. You're going to have to improve your post quality by a massive amount if you ever hope to stay around here. Even a little more detail as to why you're asking about NP would be helpful... this isn't a chat room, more words are needed.

Thanks.

[Desbreko]

[color=indigo]It sounds like you, my friend, just wasted $50 if you don't have anyone else to play the game with. Crystal Chronicles is really meant to be more of a multi-player game than a single-player, so if you don't have friends to play it with, I imagine it'd get old pretty fast.

If you ever get to play the multi-player mode, though, I think you'll change your mind about the game. When you get even just one more person in there, the gameplay gets a whole lot deeper and more complex. First off, you have to cooperate with practically [i]everything.[/i] Whether it's having one person carry the Crystal Chalice, distracting enemies with one person while the others attack from behind, or fusing spells by having different people cast the spells at the same time on the same spot, you have to be in constant communication with the other players to coordinate your exploring and fighting. Although I haven't played an incredible amount yet, since my friend owns the game, what I did play was a lot of fun. And I hope to be able to get together with said friend and play the game more tomorrow.

So from my experience with it, FFCC is excellent, it's just not meant to be a solo quest. As a multi-player action RPG, however, I think it's done a wonderful job. Except for the time that I've been distracted with Metroid Zero Mission, I've been craving more ever since I first played.

And the difficulty level is nothing to be laughed at, either, at least not on multi-player. Like I said, you really have to work together to bring enemies down, especially the bosses, all the while keeping everyone healed. Without a good amount of coordination and some strategy, you just can't beat the bosses on multi-player. A couple times my friend or I died during a boss fight and couldn't be revived, so the other tried fighting the boss alone. That never worked; we would both always die within about ten seconds of trying to take it on alone.[/color]

[Angelus]

FFCC is a great game. Simply put it is spectacular. Why is my statement true? The game is just so darn fun! I hae a blast playing the game in single player mode, but Multi player....its like real magic. The reason why there is no real character development is because there is no practical way of doing so while still keeping the game multiplayer. I understand that FFCC is a "Final Fantasy" game. But do not buy this game looking for FF12 or something like that. This game is not all about story and sweet graphics, this Final Fantasy is about fun and playing with your friends.

So remember its not bad, its just different... And highly addictive..

[satan665]

I suspected that it would be more fun multiplayer, but how can they give up on the 1P game? It seems like gamecube is really starting to focus its games on multiplayer and gameboy connectivity. It stinks because I love playing with friends, but since I moved to the West coast, none of my friends out here are game nerds like I am.

Even with a fun multiplayer, there should still be a better story. There's no excuse for having no story in a game. Prince of Persia is a good example. The gameplay is fantastic, but I'm not as interested in playing it all the time because its not compelling, and so it starts to become repetetive.

Oh, well..I'm glad someone's enjoying CC.

Oh and Nintendo Power is a horrible gaming magazine, and is completely biased because the company that reviews the games owns the console and wants to see them sell.

[Semjaza]

[quote name='satan665']Oh and Nintendo Power is a horrible gaming magazine, and is completely biased because the company that reviews the games owns the console and wants to see them sell.[/quote]

You'd think so, but they consistently give lower scores to games (including their own) than most non-official magazines and sites. There's exceptions, but review wise, I don't think bias plays much of a part in it at all.

[OtakuSennen]

[color=navy]Yes, at first I was really disappointed by this game. Normally the deal is, between my younger brother and myself, that I always play through one player mode for a while so he knows what to do, regardless of the game. Well, that did not work well with this game. The single player, I thought, was very dull.

Multiplayer, as others have addressed, is much more enjoyable. It feels as if it's some sort of Massive Multiplayer Online RPG, in a sense. You have to communicate with your team mates, and a lot more strategy has to be used when you have three or four people working together. You may have one or two characters (Lilties and Clavats, I would assume) doing most of the damage- one might cover the other when he's charging up for a focus attack-, a Yuke will be doing some magicite-based damage, as well as healing party members, and a fourth may act as a distraction (while carrying the chalice, perhaps) to the enemies. There's more methods with more players than with just yourself and Mog.

There is a bit of a problem with a thick plot being in FF:CC, though. If you only have a couple people playing in a cooperative file, you are most likely going to have those two people cycling between a few characters, so that they have a well-balanced team that is prepared for any occasion. Now, if you come across some sort of major plot twist with one set of characters, another set would be left out. Now, having those left out just being "informed" by one of the characters who witnessed the event would be sort of be a cheap excuse, correct?

Plus, you're creating your own story, which is chronicled (No pun intended) in your diary. If you read that, you have a half-feasible plot. It's certainly not as deep as FFVII or FFX, I know, but it's still there.

If you want the plot and graphics, then you should stick with the PlayStation Final Fantasy games. They seem to emphasize on turn-based, "traditional" Role Playing Games, whereas Square Enix seems to use Nintendo for changes of pace as of late- Crystal Chronicles and FF: Tactics Advance being the two examples. [/color]

[Semjaza]

Am I the only one that thinks this game looks really damn good? It's certainly not the best looking game ever, but it's far above average. If it were going for the realistic look, I see no reason why it couldn't keep up with the PS2 FF games.

[Desbreko]

[color=indigo]Yeah, I also think the game looks pretty good. The opening movie was awesome...even though I ended up having to watch it twice, since my friend screwed up the town name, lol. And the in-game graphics are pretty good, too. I'd say it stands up to Metroid Prime, and it's certainly not garbage, though it's hard to compare to the cel shaded look of The Wind Waker. Personally, I think the unrealistic style suits the game well; it's what FFIX should have looked like.[/color]

[foofghter90]

Personaly i dont think crystal crhonicles is worth it's price. It doesnt follow the normal turnbased fights that the other ff games have. But to each his own

[Shinmaru]

Honestly, I think the game looks really good, too. I don't know what the hell you other people are looking at lol. At times, the graphics have been among the best on the GameCube (not often, but at times).

I haven't had as much time with the game so far as I'd like, but I'm definitely having fun with it. You definitely get into the real-time fighting more than the turn-based stuff in other Final Fantasies. I've never been a big fan of turn-based stuff...unless the battle system has some fun quirks, I always end up horribly bored lol. With this, at least you're always taking part in the action, heh.

I'll expel more thoughts on this game (maybe) as I get further along.

[satan665]

Think of casting spells in most final fantasy games, then compare those graphics from FFX to crystal chronicles and its weak. At the end of each year you see a singing and dancing scene that cycles through, and thats weak too. The backgrounds and levels are pretty good, but not pushing any boundaries. I expect a lot more from something with the final fantasy tag on it.

[Zidargh]

[quote name='satan665'] I expect a lot more from something with the final fantasy tag on it.[/quote]

[color=darkblue] What? Is the Final Fantasy tag something that represents godliness in today's market? Jeez, the next big hit from Square Enix will be 'Final Fantasy: Pornography' or something along the lines of that.

What I'm trying to say is, coming from a big fan of the series, Final Fantasy itself is not the best series out on the market. Square Enix are going to make mistakes, and to each their own but not everyone is going to be satisfied, the company is not perfect for crying out loud.

Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles is a run-off title to perhaps act as a 'filler' in the gap between today's games and Final Fantasy XII which I highly anticipate. I know I will definitely be playing this game with three of my friends including Weh and then I'll give my opinions on the game.

But, satan665, forget the other games Square Enix have produced completely and then go back to playing the game, chances are you'll enjoy it much more and stop expecting so much of a company with the same goal as every other business, [b]to make money[/b]. Businesses are not here to 'please' the public unless a large sum of money is the resultant of this.[/color]

[Desbreko]

[color=indigo]I think another thing should also be noted, pertaining to the graphics. First off, FFCC is real time, whereas FFX is totally turnbased. Now, myself, I don't want a big, flashy spell effect in a real time RPG. I want it short and sweet, so it doesn't obscure your vision of what's going on around you. In a turnbased RPG, having big, complex animations for magic is fine, because you've got as long as you want to sit there and watch it. That's not the case in FFCC; you want to be able to cast the spell, have it do its job, and then be gone so that you can move on quickly.[/color]

[satan665]

Well, I'm glad most of you are pretty happy with this game, I'm probably just a bigger fan of the turn based RPG's. I'm still sticking to my dislike of the graphics and animations, but there's not much argument left there. Anyway, to me Final Fantasy games are about cool characters and big storylines. Obviously not all FF games are like that (FF:tactics) but really most of them are. I look to the Traditional FF games to puch the limits of graphics in cool cut scenes and crazy summons. Its a big lull for me with 11 being all online and This game dashing my expactations. I don't play online, and I don't have to time to commit to FF11 even if I did. Maybe I'll go back and play FF7 and be nostalgic.

[James]

[color=#707875]The problem is that you're comparing two completely different games. I haven't yet played FFCC, but I imagine that one cannot really compare it to the "traditional" series. Not only is it essentially a different genre, but it's largely an entirely different style of game. I would say that the only similarities it holds with the other games is the name and maybe some of the spells and such.

So, on that basis, what's the point of comparison? I don't think you can go into FFCC and expect something anywhere near FFX or other titles. Not to say that FFCC is any better or worse -- it's just different.[/color]

[Desbreko]

[color=indigo]James is right; you really can't compare Crystal Chronicles to the games in the main series. The whole game works in a fundamentally different way, so of course if you come in expecting something like you'd get from the main series, you're going to go away disappointed. FFCC is real time, while the others are turn-based. The game isn't story-oriented, it focuses on the actual gameplay and being able to play together with friends. The game doesn't have a lot of character development, but that's because it lets you create your own personal character and customize him or her however you want. Really, Crystal Chronicles is about as far away as you can get from the main FF series while still being in the RPG genre -- and even that's being stretched, since CC is more of an "action RPG."[/color]

[satan665]

I understand that its a different genre! I knew that when I was buying it, but why do you make a game and call it final fantasy when its nothing like any of the other Final Fantasy games. Its like having a Twisted Metal racing game. Its a crappy marketing ploy because Gamecube wanted an exclusive final fantasy title.

Anyway wouldn't naming the game Final Fantasy make it fair to compare it to other Final Fantasy games? Gameplay aside they have the same name! Videogames are all about name recognition, and sequels of popular games sell easier than new games with new characters. So they take a fun multiplayer game with a dull single player, and guarantee that it sells well by calling it Final Fantasy's return to the Nintendo system. Don't I have a right to be annoyed by the marketing that I fell for? Either that or I'm all wrong because it compares really well with the original gameboy final fantasy games.

Final Note; I think I'm just really annoyed because I wasted 50 bones on a game that I'm not interested in playing. But wasn't that obvious anyway. Good back and forth discussion though. :D

[Desbreko]

[color=indigo]If you bought the game thinking it would be like the games in the main series, it's only because you didn't actually look into what the game was like. Crystal Chronicles was never marketed as being like the main series games; just the opposite, in fact. The main focus of the marketing was on the multi-player aspect of the game through GBA connectivity. And actually, this is playing out just like I imagined it would. Before the game's release, I remember saying something about how a lot of people would probably blindly buy the game thinking it was like the ones in the main series, and then say it sucks because it's not what they expected. So no offense, but if you're annoyed, you have only yourself to be annoyed at.

And no, just because it has the Final Fantasy name doesn't mean that you can compare it to other Final Fantasy games. I mean, think about it: Can you compare Final Fantasy VII and Final Fantasy Tactics, even though they're both called Final Fantasy? No, you can't; they both have different types of gameplay. The same thing applies to Final Fantasy X and Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles. They're both FF games, but one is in the main series and the other is an off-shoot game, just like FFVII and FFT, and they both use different gameplay engines. Comparing any off-shoot FF game to the ones in the main series just doesn't work, because they're different types of games -- that's [i]why[/i] they're off-shoot games.[/color]

[Zidargh]

I agree with Desbreko with the majority of what has been said because he has made some very true statements. Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles I know is going to sit on the side of my multiplayer section on my shelf, no matter whether it has the title including [i]Final Fantasy[/i] in it or not.

The only other point I can really say is that none of the games in the Final Fantasy franchise can be compared to each other (Save Final Fantasy X and X-2) just for the fact that none of the games follow off of each other. All the games have different story-lines and everyone has different characters (Except for a cameo appearance of [spoiler]Cloud in Final Fantasy Tactics[/spoiler]).

So what if the games have a turn-based battle system? Many other RPGs follow this just in a different layout, for example, the Suikoden and Breath of Fire series, yet they're completely different franchises. My advice to anyone who goes buying a Square Enix Final Fantasy game 'willy-nilly', is to stop in the store, read the back of the box and contemplate on whether the game will appeal to you, I can guarantee you will then have a higher sense of satisfaction.

[satan665]

Ugh, are you kidding me! I KNEW IT WAS GOING TO BE VERY DIFFERENT than final fantasy X. I read about the game, I knew about the multiplayer aspects and I was interested in a more Zelda/Legend of Mana like feel to it.

You CAN compare this game to any other final fantasy game, I know its very different gameplay. You can compare it just like you can compare any two playstation games. They don't have to be similar in very many aspect at all to think and consider the differences between them. You can compare FFX to square's The Bouncer and say how they didn't try too hard on gameplay in the bouncer. Why shouldn't you be able to compare two games that have the same title? I think you (Desbreko) have your own preconception about what I'm thinking about this game. Pretty much everything you are saying is fair, but do you really have no expectations when a final fantasy game or a metal gear or zelda comes out. Every FF game has had more story than this one. If playing with friends is enough to sell the game, then thats a sad state of videogaming.

I know I probably sound kinda pissed, but FF aside, its more about the fact that you'd probably understand me better if this was a real conversation rather than a typed back and forth.

[James]

[quote name='satan665']Anyway wouldn't naming the game Final Fantasy make it fair to compare it to other Final Fantasy games? Gameplay aside they have the same name! [/quote][color=#707875]Well...no, not really. The thing is, you really can't put gameplay aside -- gameplay is what makes a game what it is. It's far more important than the name.

I understand what you're saying. You bought a game that said "Final Fantasy" and you expected a Final Fantasy game. But again, if one looks at the history of the franchise, there have been plenty of spinoffs. Things like Chocobo Dungeon (I hope I got the name right there) and Final Fantasy Tactics. Besides, you yourself said that you read about it and you knew about the multiplayer aspects and so on. Bear in mind that just about [i]every [/i]article talked about how the game had less story and was totally action based. If you knew these things beforehand, I don't know why you'd complain about it after buying the game.

A few people bought FFT and were surprised at how it was so different. Many of them didn't like it. But I would tell them that it's not Square Enix's fault -- all you have to do is look at the back cover of the game, and not be lazy. lol

So if anything, this experience (and others) probably demonstrates that doing a little research about the game is always beneficial, before you buy it -- even if you only read the back cover, to get an idea of what the game is like.[/color]

[Desbreko]

[color=indigo]Oh, don't get me wrong, I understand that you knew what you were getting into when you bought the game. I'm just saying that you don't really have much reason to complain about the game being unlike other FF games. Like James said, if you knew what the game was like before you bought it, how can you complain about it being different? If you really did know what the game was like beforehand, you should've known not to expect a lot of story.

Also, yes, you can compare any two games, but that doesn't mean the comparisons will be useful. You could compare a racing game with a platformer if you wanted to; they're both very action-oriented games, and they both require quick reflexes, but when it comes to the actual gameplay, they don't have much in common. So in a very broad sense, yes, you can compare any two games, but when it comes to the more specific parts of the actual gameplay, you cannot always compare just any two games. (At least not at all well, anyway). Hence, comparing the gameplay of Crystal Chronicles and a main series FF game doesn't work too well, since they use different game engines. You can like one more than the other, but it's hard to say that one is actually better than the other.

And like James said, you can't just brush the gameplay aside -- that's what makes it a [i]game.[/i] If all you want is a good story, you might as well just read a book or watch a movie. I know from personal experience that there are a lot of books out there with better stories than the Final Fantasy games have. Though story can be a big part of a game, usually if it isn't also fun to play, most people aren't going to think it's all that great.

This leads me to your comment of, "If playing with friends is enough to sell the game, then thats a sad state of videogaming." From that, it sounds to me like you're simply dismissing any game that relies heavily on being multi-player. The thing is, multi-player oriented games are very successful; Super Smash Bros. Melee is frequently in the top ten selling GCN games each month, and it's been over two years since its release. I don't see how you can dismiss Crystal Chronicles simply because it focuses on multi-player instead of single-player.

Myself, I went into Crystal Chronicles expecting exactly what I ended up getting from it. As I said in some other post (on myOtaku, I think it was), Crystal Chronicles lived up to all my expectations, because I read up on the game before playing it and I wasn't expecting it to be at all like the main series FF games. So I did have certain expectations when I first played the game, but those expectations were based off what I'd heard about the game, not on my experience with other Final Fantasy games.

If you assume that a game is going to be a certain way just by looking at others bearing the same name, you are invariably going to end up being disappointed at some time or another. Games change; if every game in a series followed the same formula every time, people would get bored of that series pretty quick. That's why there are the spin-off FF games, such as Tactics and Crystal Chronicles. These games go off in different directions than that of the main series while still retaining some of the feel that the main series has (art style, setting, those infamous little Moogles, etc.) so that people can feel comfortable and familiar with the game while still experiencing something new.[/color]

[satan665]

I guess from here on in I should look a little deeper into games I buy, but so far I haven't been disappointed in many of the impulse buys I've had. I read one of the Nintendo power preview/reviews of crystal chronicles and it sounded cool, but I missed the part of little storyline if it was there. Judging by the responses I've gotten from you all, the biggest part of my disappointment is just my gaming preference, rather than fair criticism of the game (you guys seem to like it). I'll maybe say to my last dying breath that its fair to compare to Final fantasy games no matter how different the game is, by comparing in terms of quality. That comparison is too subjective when you start talking overall gaming quality though I guess.

My problem with gamecube kinda goes back to what I mentioned way earlier. Playstation games I pretty much know what I'm getting into really well because PSM magazine is really good and they have great reviewers. I don't really like Gamepro or Nin. Power because I never feel I'm getting much out of them. My gamecube library is small but mostly I have can't misses like Zelda, Metroid and Res. Evil games. I need to fall back more on the rental system or something.