/vr/ - Retro Games

>>1104079
>I don't think so. How is it more sophisticated?
It's a lot more cohesive (which owes to the parallel worlds) while also having more instrumental variation. It also incorporates signature themes from Chrono Trigger and Radical Dreamers into its own style.

>CC's story is, sadly, pretentious instead of intellectual in that it promises intellectualism and does not deliver.
When it comes to themes, Chrono Cross poses questions, but it never gives answers. It attempts to give hints at motivations for those answers, but they're weak and the game's narrative recognizes this. It does come off a pretentious sometimes, but at least it does have thematic depth, which Trigger certainly does not, neither on its events nor on its characters; Lucca's letter in CC manages to give her twice as much depth as she had on the whole of CT.

>A much deeper attempted integration. But the game never manages to use any of the things it's building up to.
Elements tie up to the plot and the theme; you even have to fight the final battle according to the game's theme.

>Unlike Trigger, which uses each and every plot and gameplay element it establishes to mutual enrichment.
Magic was not as connected to the plot because you get people like Ayla who can summon giant magical dinosaurs; gameplay wise, they're just techs with elements. There was integration, but not as much as in CC.

>Trigger's story is a build-up and a resolution. Cross's story is a pretension and a cop-out (dragon hunting and Lavos of all things, for god's sake).
You seem to be anoyed at the dragons/Lavos. CC was building up to the dragons all along; the whole El Nido was designed and, plot-wise, MADE for them. Lavos (actually, the Time Devourer) embodies themes of the game. It may seem to come out of nowhere, but is tied to the story through the Frozen Flame (the game's catalyst) and hinted at through Miguel and Chronopolis. I don't see what's such a "cop out" about it.