[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/vr/ - Retro Games

View post   
File: 578 KB, 2676x1741, jobs.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3456723 No.3456723 [Reply] [Original]

My favorite RPGs are the ones about "building" your characters, carefully allocating various skills, class abilities and equipment until gradually, they fit flawlessly into your overall team strategy to create a play dynamic unique to your own style.

What are the best RPGs that fit this mold? My current favorites are Final Fantasy Tactics, Final Fantasy 5, and to a degree competitive Pokemon

>> No.3456743

>>3456723
Final Fantasy 2 and the SaGa games are perfect for you.

>> No.3456767

>>3456743
I played FF2 and it was too broken for my taste, I'll try out SaGa though

>> No.3456817

>>3456767
You proabably won't like SaGa either then. What did you think was broken? Did you attack your own party members? Because that's a surefire way to make the game compeltely suck. The way to have fun with FFII is not to break the systems just because you can. Play the game earnestly and it's amazing.

>> No.3456821

Diablo 2

>> No.3456874

Jagged Alliance 2

>> No.3456920

>>3456723
If you want more from Japanese origin, both the Tactic Advance and Bravely Default games would be up your alley if you liked FFT and FF5.

Don't really have any retro suggestions though.

>> No.3457025

>>3456920
FF Tactics Advance 2 is really damn good.

>> No.3457032

>>3457025
Not OP, I never played them cause they looked really kiddie. What's good about them compared to the other Tactics games?

>> No.3457037

>>3456723
mmmmmmmmmm, dat priest

>> No.3457076
File: 76 KB, 468x514, luso.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3457076

>>3457032
Well nothing's better than the original FFT, but FFTA2 was great.

Multiple races, lots of shit to do. A simpler narrative. I dunno, it's just fun.

Don't let the protag's outfit deter you.

>> No.3457081 [DELETED] 

>>3457076
Oh and fucking KILLER music.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kIU-UOr6NKU

>> No.3457085

>>3457032
They're basically worse Final Fantasy Tactics in just about every single way. The biggest boon for them is they're portable.

Worse balance, worse AI, worse job selection and flexibility, etc. It doesn't make them bad games, but, it's most like if you like the original game and can tolerate downgrades they're okay to try out.

>> No.3457086

>>3457076
It also has killer music.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4_hNMKWRyk

>> No.3457102

>>3457076
>>3457085

Ahh... I like FFT and better than the other Tactics Ogre games but I don't love them that much. It sounds like my instincts at the time were right.

>> No.3457109

>>3457102
To be honest, despite that I still say it's worth a shot more than anything. Just don't expect any political intrigue or anything like that going into it. Just take it for what it is at face value.

>> No.3457123

>>3457109
Yeah, this african-american is right. The plot of FFTA2 can be summed up on the back of a cocktail napkin.

Then again,
>playing games for the plot

Just play it because it's fun, and because you can train up absurdly powerful characters who curbstomp everything in their path.

>> No.3457158

>>3456723
I like these kind of games too. There aren't enough of them.

>> No.3457185

>>3457109
>>3457123
Plot is neither here nor there, but if the gameplay isn't as good as FFT I'm not really interested.

>> No.3457250

>>3456723
>Calculater

>> No.3457265

>>3456817
I did that and I call complete bullshit on you and your shitty opinion. FF2 was still an awful game with very little sensible design.

>> No.3457568

>>3457185
>if the gameplay isn't as good as FFT I'm not really interested.
It's arguably better than the gameplay in FFT, since the different races have certain limits on what they can do, and since your party's access to abilities is determined by how far you've made it through the main plotline.

>> No.3457603

>>3457568
Not really, the limits races impose onto the player is pretty lackluster at best and just serve to gimp most races that aren't fast unless you minmax.

Also ability access can be worked around the whole time and is never tied to the main plotline. In A1 it was twenty battles opened up the shop, and you could just run away from randoms. A2 had the auction house which is a whole either bag of worms.

That's just the bare minimum abuse you could do for either one though. Balance is definitely worse.

>> No.3457619

Almost every WRPG.

>> No.3458037

>>3457619
Too bad WRPGs other than Wizardry don't have strategic battle systems where it makes a difference.

>> No.3458119

>>3456723
D&D and the palladium are my suggestions, you do need friends, dice, pens, paper, a table and a lot of time to play them though. They aren't video games either.

>> No.3458160

anything for people that want to role-play, instead of being minmaxing shitheads like OP?

>> No.3458262

I want to play FFTA2 but then I get the urge to kill whoever thought of that shitty recruitment system.

>> No.3458341

>>3456723
>My favorite RPGs are the ones about "building" your characters, carefully allocating various skills, class abilities and equipment
>My current favorites are Final Fantasy Tactics, Final Fantasy 5, and to a degree competitive Pokemon
Talk about cognitive dissonance.
So basically you want a game that plays itself where allocating various skills, class abilities and equipment actually means following templates and mixmatch, that's not building your character carefully, it's following a closed class system.
>Pokemon
>competitive
Yeah, if you're six maybe.
>Thinks FF2 is broken
>He actually hit himself thinking it's the best method for levelling
Yeah, you definitely want a light RPG that plays itself and doesn't require thought processes other than press x to win.

Then again, who knows, maybe you might like something that actually plays like you say so try these:

SaGa games
Metal Max games
Dark Law
Tactics Ogre to a degree since it's what FFT ripped off
Front Mission 2

As for Wrpgs you can play:

Shadowrun
Baldur's Gate I/II
TES games
Diablo

but there's really too many to mention, most of them are lackluster or too archaic, and I don't think you'll have any fun considering you actually don't want that degree of control.

Don't know whether you know Japanese but if you do you can try:

Lunatic Dawn games
Zill O'll
Traverse: Starlight&Prairie

You do require some good japanese knowledge, especially for Lunatic Dawn.

If you're into semi RTS here's also the Uncharted Waters series which is pretty damn good.

>> No.3458369

>>3456723
I can never decide between oracle and chemist.

>> No.3458421

>>3457265
Am I reading that correctly? You're saying you did in fact go around attacking your own party members in FFII and are still saying it's bullshit with awful design? How would you even know?

FFII is great because the way you make an awesome mage isn't by just choosing to put points into Intelligence when they level up or giving them the right "mage gear". You make an awesome mage by working at it through the whole game. Having them cast spells every time they're in combat, work on the ones you want them to focus on. Build them up bit by bit, the whole time you're playing.

It's good because in order to make your characters grow into that awesome mage or fighter or monk you want them to be, you have to actually play them that way. It's the closest thing to actual roleplaying most JRPGs ever get to.

It's also just nice to have mage characters in an JRPG always be doing magic stuff of some sort. Be it attacking or sapping MP or debuffing. Instead of most where they spend the bulk of random encounters either just attacking or defending so they can reserve MP for the upcoming boss fight.

Sure if you want to, you can spend a couple of hours outside the first town attacking your own guys till you're stupid powerful. Then you can walk to Mysidia, buy a bunch of the most powerful spells and equipment there is and steamroll the rest of the game. You would completely ruin the gameplay, but it does let you do that if you want. I think that freedom is pretty cool. But I think the game is way, way more fun when played earnestly. There are very few JRPGs where decisions in random battles actually matter.

>> No.3458432

>>3458421
>Having them cast spells every time they're in combat, work on the ones you want them to focus on
why? Do they gain xp per usage or something?

>> No.3458457
File: 129 KB, 703x1000, Amano_Guy.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3458457

>>3458432
The way FFII works is that each time you use a spell or attack with a weapon or defend, etc it will improve that skill a tiny bit. The way you level up Fire or Cure or Haste is by casting them a lot. It's similar for HP and MP as well. The way you build up more MP is by using it up in battle. The way you build more HP is by taking damage.

So if you play the game normally, the guy you want to attack physically (if you want someone like that) will slowly get better with his sword or axe or bow or whatever and build strength because he's attacking. Your mage (if you want a mage) will be casting the spells you want them to level up.

Some times you're kicking ass and breezing through, but then you'll get to a new dungeon and the monsters will start fucking you up. That's when you take a lot of damage, fights are tougher and your health goes up. It works pretty brilliantly actually.

You don't make a fighter or white mage or bard or whatever by selecting it from a menu. You make them by training the character into that kind of a role. For some reason because he looks the part I always think of Guy as a monk so that's how I train him. I go with bare fists and alternate between attacking and white magic.

>> No.3458459

>>3458457
could you become a master of all trades, given "infinite" patience?

>> No.3458470

>>3458459
In the GBA/PSP versions you could, yes. It would take a crazy long time, but would be possible. They also have faster stat gain which would help a bit.

In the original though, probably not. It's balanced so that skills you're not using also slowly degrade over time. So if you start off using swords for a while and then decide you want that character to focus on bows or spells or whatever, his sword skill would slowly drop over time. There are so many skills and around 40 spells that I don't think it would be possible to level them all without some dropping away.

>> No.3458471

>>3458470
>It's balanced so that skills you're not using also slowly degrade over time
can anybody confirm? Would be the first time I've heard of any RPG doing that

>> No.3458480

>>3458471
Google will confirm it for you in 10 seconds if you look. The game is indeed that way. I'm pretty sure it's not unique though, at least if you count western rpgs.

Real talk, FFII in all it's forms is fucking awesome.

>> No.3458481

>>3458480
>I'm pretty sure it's not unique though
As I said, never heard of any game doing it. I've been seeking RPGs that do that.

>FFII in all it's forms is fucking awesome
in the end it's still FF. Quite a shame. Thanks anyway.

>> No.3458485

>>3458481
>in the end it's still FF. Quite a shame.

What does that mean?

>> No.3458491

>>3458480
>Google will confirm it for you in 10 seconds if you look
I see mentions of opposing stats (increase on one decreases the other), but no degradation over time

>> No.3458513

>>3458485
I have a very negative opinion of the series

>> No.3458520

The way people overhype FFII on this website blows my fucking mind. It's some clinical case of contrarianism.

FFII isn't a terrible game by any means but it's not deep or challenging or very interesting. Combat is still hold A to win, unlike latter installations that at least make use of elemental and status weaknesses and ATB tricks and such. The choices you make in building your characters are not super meaningful either, yeah you can make everyone a mage or a monk but you could also do that in the first game except not in a roundabout way, with less trap options and the same depth of combat. And that isn't even going into other flaws like glitches and bad dungeon design and blatantly worthless companions. It's an okay game, good ideas with mediocre execution but a demo version of the SaGa series is all it will ever be.

And yes, I've beaten it several times on all releases.

>> No.3458528

>>3458520
sounds like you're expecting something from RPGs that FF2 has no intentions to deliver. Can't really blame the game for that

>> No.3458530

>>3458513
That's totally fair. There are some games I like in it, but I wouldn't call myself a fan of them, and there are a few that I really hate. FFII in most ways doesn't feel like a Final Fantasy. First there's the stat growth that totally changes how you play.

There's also a neat keyword system where you have to actually ask specific people about specific things to move the plot, not just let the game automate that. It's a very unusual game for a JRPG. I wouldn't discount it just because it says Final Fantasy on the box, but it's very different from the other ones in the series.

>> No.3458539

>>3458530
>It's a very unusual game for a JRPG.
It's still an RPG. Shame about all the good ideas being wasted on ... this

>> No.3458541

>>3458520
>but you could also do that in the first game except not in a roundabout way

It's the roundabout way that makes it interesting for me. Not making a mage by picking mage at the beginning of the game and then hardly ever having them use magic. Making a mage by having them use magic all the time till they're awesome at it.

I hate FFI though so whatever. I get that it's a contentious game, but I love it.

>> No.3458546

>>3456723
I've seen this pasta before. FFT is the best for me

>> No.3458547

>>3458539
>It's still an RPG.

Wait what..?. so you don't like RPGs in general, not just FF? What are you even looking for then? There's also Roguelikes if you want to delve into stats and character building.

>> No.3458549

>>3458547
I fucked up. Meant to say it's still a JRPG. I like RPGs, especially ones that emphasize the RP. JRPGs have a bit of an annoying tradition to emphasize what ever deranged narrative the director cooked up

>> No.3458553

>>3458549
Huh, that's fair I guess. Honestly I've never played an RPG of either sort that had a story I found actually interesting. I mostly play them for world exploring and character building and only pay enough attention to the plot so I know what to do next. When I want good narrative I pick up a book, games have always been disappointing there so to me they're just for playing.

>> No.3458556

>>3458528
No, I'm expecting what people on the internet hype it for, a game with a shitton of customization and strategy. Unfortunately, it doesn't have enough meaningful choice in it to truly shine, even compared to other JRPGs like FFT or FFV. And it's just not very good aside from the leveling system either.

>> No.3458570

>>3458553
Well, the plot does have a dominant role in these games. I prefer it to be, or at least feel, emergent though. As little of an RPG as it is, Deus Ex killed it in that regard. One of the very few games where I felt that I was driving the story, not watching it. As for world exploring and character building, yes, definitely, but only within the context of these characters. If they have no reason to explore, it's just a crappy sandbox, and I want character beyond a handful of stats. Though I got to say, FF2 is at least a prototype of how I expect an RPG role to work. Stat allocation was always a big turn off, as it produces a strong disconnect with the character. The role being played is not the role the character has. Good RPGs, imho, force the player to play the role, consistently. It's not much of a role otherwise.
Regardless, I developed a strong dislike against the hero-saves-the-world kind of stories. I want something whimsical, local, small scale. One more reason against JRPGs.

>> No.3458578

>>3458570
it's not like WRPGs do local, small scale and especially whimsical a whole lot either

>> No.3458582

>>3458578
indeed, they don't. Shit sucks

>> No.3458594

>>3458570
>Well, the plot does have a dominant role in these games.

Yes and no. It was usually a focus during development, but it doesn't necessarily mean it's a large part of your experience playing it.

Personally, I've played a ton of rpgs over the years and though I could barely tell you anything about the stories of most of them. Partly it's because they blend together out of sameness, but also because I ignore or willfully forget most of it. FFII for instance I've played through 4 times over the years and could barely tell you what the actual story is.

I look at an RPG kind of like a huge painting that I get to explore. See what the world is like, the different towns, the dungeons and cool monsters. If the "game" bit in between has interesting strategy decisions then all the better, but with those games it's primarily the exploring that I'm there for.

All that is to say that we all play things for different reasons so the same game might be great for you but terrible for me or vice versa depending on what we're looking for out of a game.

>> No.3458598

>>3458594
>it doesn't necessarily mean it's a large part of your experience playing it.
was the case in all JRPGs I had to suffer through

>also because I ignore or willfully forget most of it
I couldn't play RPGs like that. Because the only thing that would then remain is the annoyingly convoluted "tactical" combat systems. For some people that's the sole purpose of RPGs, like >>3458520. For me it's a nuissance.

>See what the world is like, the different towns, the dungeons and cool monsters
usually empty and bland, as they're just tools for the combat system, instead of having any in-world purpose

>> No.3458606

>>3456723
Wizardry is exactly what you want. Especially if you're one of those autists that multiclasses for ultra min/maxing

>> No.3458615

>>3458598
>was the case in all JRPGs I had to suffer through

I just mash through dialogue and ignore or skim. But then like I say we're approaching it totally differently. I'm there to explore the world and see what's there. To me they're like vacation games. Not something I play for challenge, more for relaxing.

If you're into stats and strategy and don't need a real story, Roguelikes are a pretty amazing thing to get into.

>> No.3458623

>>3458615
>I just mash through dialogue and ignore or skim
if I were to do that, there would be very little left. Just senseless fighting over and over without a reason

>Not something I play for challenge
since when does a story motivation need to be a challenge?

>If you're into stats and strategy and don't need a real story
lol, what? You're reading, right? I pretty much said that shit annoys me, greatly. I want roles, not some minmaxing bullshit

>Roguelikes are a pretty amazing thing to get into
I do play some roguelikes occasionally, but certainly not for that reason. Someone kill me if I ever minmax a game

>> No.3458630

>>3458623
>if I were to do that, there would be very little left.
Exactly what I'm saying. We play these games for totally different reasons.

>since when does a story motivation need to be a challenge?
Since when did I imply it was? I just said it's not an interest of mine when it comes to games.

> I want roles, not some minmaxing bullshit
That's what I was talking about, at least in terms of games where gameplay influences how you "roleplay" your character. But from a mechanics and strategy standpoint as opposed to a narrative one.

>> No.3458636

>>3458630
>Exactly what I'm saying
not really. You said you're playing it for exploration, I said in most of them this aspect is paper-thin

>Since when did I imply it was?
>>3458615
>I say we're approaching it totally differently. (...) Not something I play for challenge, more for relaxing.

>strategy
gross

>as opposed to a narrative one.
no idea where you pull that dichotomy from

>> No.3458640

>>3458160
>to role-play
Do you mean experiencing le Chris Avelone's visual dad jokes compendiums with dialog options?

>> No.3458645 [DELETED] 

>>3458640
I meant role-playing. You can tell because I used the term role-play

>> No.3458654

>>3458636
>You said you're playing it for exploration, I said in most of them this aspect is paper-thin

I don't disagree with that. But that's still why I play them. Actually paper thin is very apt as I said, I look at them kind of like big paintings I look over. I don't play them for challenge or interesting gameplay, just to relax and explore a world. You don't have to enjoy that.

>gross
What's gross? Playing different genres for different reasons? I don't understand where you're going with that.

>> No.3458658

>>3458645
>I meant role-playing.
OP did as well.
> "building" your characters, carefully allocating various skills, class abilities and equipment until gradually, they fit flawlessly into your overall team strategy to create a play dynamic unique to your own style.

>> No.3458662

>>3458645
If you really want role-playing, video games are the worst for it. Get a group of friends and some D&D, WoD, Gurps, or whatever floats your boat and have a party. These games are all trying (and failing mostly) to be imitations of that experience.

>> No.3458663

>>3458658
that's not roleplaying, that's minmaxing bullshit

>> No.3458665 [DELETED] 

>>3458662
>These games are all trying (and failing mostly) to be imitations of that experience.
I want them to try harder. RPG devs are too content in their failure. They're happy with being crude combat emulators, ignoring everything else that makes up role-playing. Video games can do these things. Devs just don't give a damn.

Also, I'm a social retard, so real life gaming groups are not an option

>> No.3458667

>>3458663
It's not minmaxing bullshit if you don't minmax and bullshit it though.

>> No.3458674 [DELETED] 

>>3458667
allocating points, without exception, is minmaxing bullshit. It means complete disregard for the character and their role. Whatever the character did, didn't do, or anything else, doesn't matter. You just click the little up arrow and that's it. And yes, "team strategy" is minmaxing bullshit

>> No.3458676

>>3458665
>I want them to try harder. RPG devs are too content in their failure.
>Also, I'm a social retard, so real life gaming groups are not an option

I feel like this sums up the entire thing. Good luck being miserable with how things are because they're not exactly the way you want them to be. It's probably why you have trouble with people too. I think we're done here.

>> No.3458680

>>3458674
Ah, I see, you're not only a social retard.

>> No.3458681

>>3458674
lol

>> No.3458682
File: 2.52 MB, 480x360, sanic1464188997240.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3458682

>>3458680
They're rarely just one kind.

>> No.3458687

>>3456821

not true unfortunately. diablo 2 certain gear requirements for your end game, and as a result the objectively optimal way to play is to allocate points for those to the bare minimum and put the rest in vitality.

>> No.3458690

>>3458687

>diablo 2 certain gear requirements, and as a result

i accidentally my sentence

>> No.3458692
File: 94 KB, 812x362, 0021-023.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3458692

>>3458645
>>3458665
>>3458674
Just to inform you, but on this facebook deleting your own posts after shitting the pants is just an icing on the cake for everyone.

>> No.3458693

>>3458687
But the point of the fun of Diablo 2 is exploring all the other ways to play even though they're not the objectively optimal one.

Also remember that it's from an era before the internet was what it is now. Back then games were about trying to find what worked best through experimentation. Now that you can find the most statistically optimal way to play any game that's been made, it's hard to ignore that information.

>> No.3458695

>>3458692
This. It's like when a dog is running away with it's tail between it's legs and then it pees as well. Delicious. This guy is around here a lot though and he's always saying derpy shit.

>> No.3458709

>>3458692
>but on this facebook
>shitting the pants
>is just an icing

lmaooooo

what's your first language? i mean, the sentence was totally legible from context, but it's the small things that betray you.

>> No.3458717

>>3458520
>unlike latter installations that at least make use of elemental and status weaknesses and ATB tricks and such.
Elemental and status weaknesses have been present since the very first FF, FFII only emphasize that since elemental spells do shit tons of damage and you can instakill or cripple enemies with the right status effect. ATB is a meaningless gimmick that only makes battles longer and has no bearing whatsoever on battles since nothing poses a significant threat so that ATB can actually mean anything but more frequent animations.
>The choices you make in building your characters are not super meaningful either
It's literal practical roleplay, it is extremely meaningful, so meaningful that TES ripped it off almost completely down to the levelling oversights and without it SaGa wouldn't even exist.
>yeah you can make everyone a mage or a monk but you could also do that in the first game except not in a roundabout way
I don't recall monks being capable of using magic in the first FF, just as much as I don't recall making monks who're also good with spears or whatever weapon you want, let alone offensive or support spells.
Yes, SaGa is actually what FFII should have been, but that doesn't make FFII bad, especially for its time.
>>3458549
>JRPGs have a bit of an annoying tradition to emphasize what ever deranged narrative the director cooked up
WRPG do the very same, see garbage like Planescape: Torment or Baldur's Gate, and you didn't play many JRPGs anyway, especially if you say stupid shit like that.
RPGs in general focus on deranged narrative down to the tabletop progenitors of videogames, so if that doesn't tickle your fancy drop them, they aren't going to get any better.
>>3458663
The role play you want in videogames doesn't exist if not in games like MUDs, which are literally the most cringeworthy shit ever conceived when it comes to videogames, or MMORPGs if you're into ERPing, which is almost as cringeworthy as MUDs.
Go LARP somewhere.

>> No.3458730

>>3456723
Robotrek.

>> No.3458736

>>3458457
I may actually give FF2 another chance. I wasn't aware that this was how it worked and assumed it pretty much railroaded all your characters into their job/class like the rest of the series.

Years ago I used to play Ultima Online and I was stuck with how the stats and skills were based on usage and not allocated points based on levels, which was what caused me to switch from JRPG's to W/cRPG's

>> No.3458747

>>3458736
struck*

>> No.3458751

>>3458736
W/cRPGs are heavy on point assignments, very few of them are usage based

>> No.3458754

>>3458421
>Am I reading that correctly?
No. I played FFII without bothering to abuse any of the known game breakers, tried and failed to use status effects that didn't instantly win fights because you have to grind spells out the ass to get them to have a reasonable success rate even against the things that are weak to them, and I still hated the fuck out of the game. It was a thoroughly boring, shitty game that was outdone in every single way by SaGa 1, which is itself outdone in every way by games like SaGa 2 and the entire Romancing SaGa series.

>> No.3458758

>>3458736
You might really like SaGa then, if you get in FFII consider playing SaGa games, they're the natural evolution of that, SaGa 1 on GB is already leaps and bounds better than FFII, the Romancing trilogy and Frontier games are tons of fun and way more complex, expanded and satisfying to play.

>> No.3458779 [DELETED] 

test

>> No.3459116

>>3458693
The permanence of your choices over a long period is what really made that game great. Yes, D3 is a better game, but D2 was a better character builder.

>> No.3459220

>>3457085
They have better balance and less stupid job requirements, more class variety and cool abilities to go with it (motherfucking Magick Frenzy to name one), as well as better reaction ability system (Brave is always better except for finding items, really Square?), and no zodiac or Faith systems.

They kept the worst thing that FFT introduced that wasn't in its FFV roots though: job-specific stat growths that punish you for every bit of time spent outside Ninja or Mime. It has no benefit to the game. Playing as Job X inexplicably makes you worse at Job X over time compared to someone who trained in a better class, and trying out a variety of jobs carries a penalty when that's the point of exploring the mechanics.

>> No.3459229

>>3459220
>giving a shit about stat growth
>in fucking FFT

I literally am like level 14 in Chapter 4 and have kept my guys as blackmages the entire game.

>> No.3459325

>>3459220
Really? At best it's just as broken as FFT if not more so. Some races are horribly outclassed and are borderline worthless at times. You're better off just focusing on speedy classes and races over something like Bangas.

Except job requirements don't come from actions performed, only if they're present in the battle. You could have a unit who literally takes a dirt nap the whole battle and still gets AP for doing so.

The class variety is arguably worse since everything is split up into custom races. There are more jobs yes, but due to how races stat spreads are it's generally foolish to try to go outside the flow of each race unless you minmax to a ridiculous level.

Abilities are generally not as unique as they are in FFT due to there being no CT system. They're just elemental or super charged attacks with little to no drawback a lot of the time. It's like they looked at math skill and thought it would be a great idea if everything was instantaneous.

Fair point on treasure finding being affected by brave, but the rest just makes the game less complex, and a million times less enjoyable to me in the long run because of it.

Also stat growths don't matter in FFT at all, literally at all. It was the multipliers that that made jobs useful more than anything.They matter a million times more in FFTA where they reduce multipliers from classes and just make it flat growths that influence a character's growth.

>> No.3460452

>>3458754
>shitty game that was outdone in every single way by SaGa 1

SaGa 1/FF Legend is one of my favorite games on Gameboy, but you saying it out did Final Fantasy 2 is ridiculous to the point I seriously question if you've played either of them.

>> No.3460880

>>3459325
Farming rocks thrown is not anyone's ideal form of character growth. Actions = XP just made certain classes fall behind if they had to get into positions, and sometimes it IS ideal for a unit to make a self-sacrificial strategic play that they should get the full battle XP for. It's nuance for its own sake and its only gameplay effects over universal XP turned out to be bad.

Abilities that used CT were ridiculously bad because of it and got worse as the game progressed, becoming straight-up nonfunctional after Speed stats reach mid- to late-game levels. If that hadn't been the case I'd agree that they could have made the game more interesting. Also Math wasn't the only thing that had zero execution times, all the broken swordsaint abilities, items and most things on the physical tree just ignored the mechanic as if they realized halfway through how busted it was.

And stat growths are serious business if you ever try to use bards, dancers or calculators for extended periods of time. They don't even line up with the multipliers. The game should have been JUST multipliers! They made it a lot worse in the TA games though.

>> No.3461021

I notice people saying Saga is like FFII, but the levelling in Saga seems a bit random when compared to FFII
is stat growth weapon dependant in SaGa?

also, I absolutely hate weapon durability, so I prefer RS over the gameboy games
Minstrel Song was great though because of the weapon modifocations

>> No.3461060

>>3461021
Yes. Daggers, rapiers, whips, and bows will get you Agility(although whips use Strength for damage in SaGa 2 and above), everything else gets you Strength.

>> No.3461068

>>3461021
>is stat growth weapon dependant in SaGa?
Yes, just like every game in the series bar vanilla 3, which was "fixed" for the DS remake.

>> No.3461070

>>3456723
i have a qusetion if you can plz answer the dark night was a add on latter in the iso for phone right ? it was never in the first game for playstion i say this because im DAM sure i maxed like ever class and i dont see how i missed it

>> No.3461071

>>3461060
thanks
I assume magic power and MP (or JP, BP whatever) increase by using magic? (The gameboy games have uses if I remember correctly)
what about HP, defense etc?

btw it blows mind that a game like FFII was made for the NES
I wish it had a hacking community that would fix some of its problems (remove exploits and make guests more useful mostly)

>> No.3461089

>>3461071
>btw it blows mind that a game like FFII was made for the NES
That's Kawazu for you, you chould check his other games, he loves making crazy shit.
FF went to shit the moment he jumped ship to make SaGa.
>I wish it had a hacking community that would fix some of its problems
The hacking community is more busy with making countless Romancing SaGa 3, patches and hacks, no point in hacking FFII when there's much better than that.

>> No.3461094

>>3461071
>it blows mind that a game like FFII was made for the NES
why?

>> No.3461106

Anyone know if Dawn of Souls' FFII remake keeps its unique leveling system? I wanna try it out

>> No.3461109

>>3461094
because it's an ambitious and unique game in terms of gameplay and story, released in a time when most console RPGs were dragon quest clones

>> No.3461113

>>3461109
the NES isn't supposed to do unique or ambitious games or what are you saying? Why would this game "blow your mind"? What does it do it's not supposed to be doing, or that seemed impossible?

>> No.3461130

>>3461106
it does, but it removed stat decreases and you gain HP automatically every ten battles
it also has auto targeting, a run button and you can save in dungeons

>> No.3461134

>>3461130
So are these just QoL improvements or is it worth it to emulate the original?

>> No.3461139

>>3461130
>removed stat decreases
>gain HP automatically every ten battles

>>3461134
>QoL

That's not QoL, that's game damaging rubbish

>> No.3461145

>>3461139
So I should find a ROM of the original?

>> No.3461161

>>3461113
>the NES isn't supposed to do unique or ambitious games or what are you saying?
What? I'm saying that most NES RPGs are generic while FFII tried to do something new
>Why would this game "blow your mind"?
Because it removed EXP and let you customize your characters through gameplay?

>> No.3461170

>>3461161
>Because it removed EXP and let you customize your characters through gameplay?
wait, games that are made with a hint of game mechanics ... blow your mind? wtf?

>> No.3461184

>>3461170
how many RPGs did something similar at the time?
how many RPGs with innovative gameplay mechanics were there on the NES? Less than ten maybe?

>> No.3461189

>>3461184
and why exactly would the bare minimum of game design blow your mind again? Because the rest is utterly repetitive shit?

>> No.3461192

>>3461184
Xanadu was highly popular with a learning by doing system. It just wasn't portable to the Famicom which got Faxanadu as a simplified version.

>>3461161
>>3461109
There weren't that many RPG on the Famicom back when FF2 came out.

>> No.3461203

>>3461189
>and why exactly would the bare minimum of game design blow your mind again?

because most RPGs don't bother coming up with that "bare minimum" and are content with doing what was done before?

>> No.3461204

>>3461189
So much anger. Delicious.

>> No.3461205

>>3458457
My problem with FF2 and other games of the ilk (Like X-COM) is that it penalizes your growths for playing optimally.

In FF2, I often found myself ending random battles too quickly where I'd take no damage at all, meaning my defense/HP would never rise although my attack power would go up. This led to weird situations like doing 500 damage a hit and having only 50 or so HP, and by that time, things were one-shoting my party, preventing defensive growths until I went to weaker enemies. This had other issues like never needing cure magic since all attacks that connected were fatal, so that never leveled either.

X-COM had a similar issue where if I didn't purposely set out to train my soldier's attributes, many wouldn't ever increase from their defaults. Using a high powered weapon with great accuracy would mean each soldier would only get about one or two shots to connect each mission, resulting in 0-1 FA growth, whereas forcing them to use pistols and shooting at terror units would get them the full growth. Reactions was another bad thing, since outside of the mind control bug, trying to train reactions against a live target is very, very slow.

Fire Emblem had trouble like this too, if you used characters that were weapon triangle correct, you'd wind up with a few overleveled characters and some others lagging behind based on the enemy composition, so you wound up having to make suboptimal decisions like forcing thieves to fight to get XP. This was somewhat corrected in later installments with the introduction of bonus XP (Rewarded to you based on how fast and efficiently you cleared a map) where you could allocate experience to less used party members to ensure they'd be ready or useful when the time came. I think games that have use based growths would do great if they implemented something like that as well, some way to balance out underused stats so they don't stay at their base values.

>> No.3461210

>>3461205
>This led to weird situations like doing 500 damage a hit and having only 50 or so HP

That sounds hard to do unless you went out of your way to grind up attack early on. Normally if you keep moving and don't just grind in one spot, you will quickly start running into enemies you can't kill in just one or two rounds. That's when your HP and evasion skills start going up.

Mindless grinding will still ruin this game just like any other.

>> No.3461220

>>3460880
Except you don't need to "farm rocks" anytime throughout the whole game. You can just play it by hopping from story to story battle and still unlock everything you wanted throughout the course of the game. There is literally zero reason you'd need to grind like that throughout the game. Units just taking a dirt nap with no consequence shouldn't be awarded AP just for showing up. That's just a shitty participation award trophy at best.If your unit is going to do a play like that it needs to have the right consequences for doing so, which there are essentially none in TA/TA2. The Jagds are the only place where this exists and it's still just a slap on the wrist.

Abilities that used CT are just fine. The majority of the game you could just walk up and target someone with a spell and they'd explode from it. Hell you can even do this when enemies are fast enough to avoid your powerful long charging spells. You just need to plan accordingly. When enemies do start getting faster in Chapter 4 you have a lot more options to slow them down though. Multiple status effects, speed break, etc all exist to help manipulate the enemy's ability to react to your actions. If you're not using these and blaming that magic isn't good enough then I don't know what to say to you.

Also, yes I know there are more instantaneous abilities in the game. I just used math skill as an example. Yes most sword skills are very strong, but, they're not any less strong than some of the combinations and set ups you can do in FFTA/A2.

Stat growths still literally mean zero when it comes to developing characters for story purposes. The only way this could be an "issue" is if you choose to level that unit from 1-99 in that single job. Most players will use equipment and change jobs to counteract the "lost" stats. Anyway, post is too long, point is across, I'll stop there.

>> No.3461221

>>3461210
I don't know, I had that issue until Minwu and fighting the Sargent in the cave just by playing. At first I was killing bees in a single hit, then so on and so forth until I couldn't quite kill him in one go. After losing everyone but Minwu against him, I went back to the starting zone to let enemies beat up on me to get some HP.

It's why I think a lot of problems with FF2 would be solved if a single action caused a stat growth for a primary stat and lesser growths for secondary ones. IE Physical combat causes strength and weapon skill to go up like normal, but also a slight gain to HP, same for other actions to ensure that other relevant stats don't completely go without growths.

It was like the time when I had a lord character in FE that got a grand total of 3 defense and 6 HP in 20 levels. That above average strength just can't carry them when they can't last long enough for a heal.

>> No.3461231

>>3461221
>Sargent
everyone except Minwu goes in the back row, Minwu casts blink on himself while one of your characters casts black magic (or you can use the fire tome you receive in the dungeon on him)
that's how I do it

>> No.3461243

>>3461231
I had Guy spamming magic and the other two of my party using an axe and a spear in whatever armor I could find. Forgot what I was doing with Minwu, I might've been casting black magic with him too.

I probably could've done it your way as well, but it would've led to an even longer period of no HP gains while I simply used image to avoid attacks. Makes me wonder how long I could've gone before I would have to throw in the towel and start leveling HP.

>> No.3461253

>>3461243
when I'm on the overworld (because I can save there) I have everyone except the guest character in the front row (don't want him stealing my stats)
if I want to raise a specific chatacter's hp, I leave just him in the front and remove his armor
my problem is that physical defense is useless and can only be raised by stronger equipment, which doesn't seem to help much
which makes raising evasion pretty much mandatory for your frontliners

>> No.3461814
File: 53 KB, 387x305, IMG-20160703-WA0004.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3461814

>>3458119
>friends
Welps