Saph's newest FF7 run

[Yvlla]

Originally Posted by Lancet Jades

Just so you know, I'm fairly sure (if not outright positive) that he does like FF9's plot, but feels the battle system drags the game down too much for the plot to save it.

Yup. Like I said, I played the game 4 times for the story alone.

Originally Posted by [PhiberOpticks

;404289]And switching out menu items for sequences with button prompts doesn't exactly make a Limit Break anything special.

It is. It makes the game more skill-based, not to mention how satisfying they made Squall's Renozuken.

You know, this thread is really making me realize that FF8 is my favorite PSX FF. Congrats Saph, you just inadvertently dethroned FF7 for me.

Originally Posted by Lancet Jades

They aren't arbitrary for the majority of the game, save for people who grind to unholy levels before the endgame.

Even then, there's locks.

Originally Posted by [PhiberOpticks

;404294]If they're going to do that, why not just throw everyone out into the battle at once?

Uh, because that would ruin any planning and strategy?

[[PhiberOpticks]]

Originally Posted by Yvl

It is. It makes the game more skill-based, not to mention how satisfying they made Squall's Renozuken.

Touche. But Renozuken's button prompting isn't predicated on strategy, but response time. In other words, the Squall's Limit Break contributes no more to any player's strategy than the different Trances of FF9 characters.

Uh, because that would ruin any planning and strategy?

My point is that the very ability to use any and all characters during an FFX battle already ruins any planning or strategy.

I must say, that I'm a sucker for plot more than anything else. Even if FF9 had mediocre game play, I'd keep playing it just to see what happens. Same goes for FF7. Not so much FF8. And definitely not so much with FF10. But that's just my opinion and not grounded with any factual evidence.

[Lancet Jades]

Originally Posted by [PhiberOpticks

;404297]Touche. But Renozuken's button prompting isn't predicated on strategy, but response time. In other words, the Squall's Limit Break contributes no more to any player's strategy than the different Trances of FF9 characters.

This really is true, Yvl. It's player candy, to give them some manner of input on something, with the penalty that failing to do so properly weakens the attack. It's no different than additions in Legend of Dragoon, or boosting, or similar things. It is not strategy in any way, since the ability to either enhance (with boosting) or prevent from failing (renzokuken, additions) is always provided, and reflex (and/or the game's ability to let you know when to press) determines whether or not it fails.

Originally Posted by [PhiberOpticks

;404297]My point is that the very ability to use any and all characters during an FFX battle already ruins any planning or strategy.

No it doesn't, it just makes the strategy different. Once they act, a character is stuck in battle until their next turn. If they are KO'd, sleeping, confused, petrified, etc., they cannot be switched out until healed (and then waiting for their next turn). It isn't like you can pause the battle at any point and change your team around as you please. Effectively switching people out as a situation dictates (especially over multiple battles, with random enemies that have vastly varying weaknesses) IS strategy, much moreso than timed button pushing to not gimp an attack.

So what if you can call Yuna in at any time to heal people? She needs to stay in battle until her next turn, and whoever switched out to bring her in is out of battle, and cannot act until they return.

[Snips]

Originally Posted by Yvl

If someone says that their pet can tank, they are a retard, and you have every reason to be upset. They're what we call "huntards" and are universally loathed from level 1 on. Telling you to heal as a tankadin is infuriating as well, but a moot point nowadays since people just use the auto-group finder now, which assigns a role to each member.

Back in the day it just grabbed everyone and anyone who wanted to do that instance. If it assigned roles, it didn't look at specs! (I've seen DPS shamans joing groups of all rogues and hunters, or parties with 2 resto druids, etc, on my alts) It was so bad I actually kept a set of healing gear as backup because I knew 2/3 of parties did not want to let the tank do his job. (My main set was plate armor, Mograine's shield, and the Ardent Custodian, whereas my healing set was cloth and the blood-tempered ranseur)

Originally Posted by Yvl

I've never heard them called anything but retardin since I joined. I don't think you coined the term.

Apparently I was the first one to say it in my server. I was actively socializing in all the major circles, and when I said Retardin, some of the endgame raiders were chiming in "Hey, neat, retardin, I like it!" and within a week, everyone who was level 40+ was saying it. The entire server. While I may not have been the first one to say it ever, I sure brought the term to a new audience.

Originally Posted by Yvl

My class/spec is fucking outstanding, but I still don't know how other classes are faring (except Warriors, who were nerfed to all hell unintentionally). It won't be until December that everything is worked out enough for anyone to know if it's any good.

Heh, I know all about unintentional nerfing. I was helping the head programmers rebalance a rebalance gone wrong in another game by testing and providing data. I was like, "Um yeah, I can't help that my main DPSer went from hitting near the damage cap to hitting less than the defensive tank classes." And they didn't believe me, so then they asked me to collect screenshots and numbers, which led to a mountain of WTFs, so then one of them tested it themselves and was like "WHAT HAVE I DONE!?" All it takes is one little mistake and boom.

I'm curious about how most of the classes are doing these days, but I guess it needs to wait till December 7th to see for sure. At the very least, I can ask for your opinion. If I got back into the game, I might start with a Shaman (Race depends on my spec), Druids (Pretty sure only Tauren can be druids on the horde side), Priest (Likely undead), Mage (likely undead), or Warlock (Undead for converting HP to MP + Cannibalism for no downtime). What's your take on these classes currently?

Originally Posted by Yvl

Huh, summons were awesome, if for nothing else than the glee you get from breaking your boost record. And Doomtrain.

I always get laughed at for saying I summonned. I mean, it's a second HP bar and heavy damage to all enemies, right from the start of the game, you can't really go wrong, am I right?

[[PhiberOpticks]]

Originally Posted by Lancet Jades

No it doesn't, it just makes the strategy different. Once they act, a character is stuck in battle until their next turn. If they are KO'd, sleeping, confused, petrified, etc., they cannot be switched out until healed (and then waiting for their next turn). It isn't like you can pause the battle at any point and change your team around as you please. Effectively switching people out as a situation dictates (especially over multiple battles, with random enemies that have vastly varying weaknesses) IS strategy, much moreso than timed button pushing to not gimp an attack.

So what if you can call Yuna in at any time to heal people? She needs to stay in battle until her next turn, and whoever switched out to bring her in is out of battle, and cannot act until they return.

A very valid point. And yet the kind of strategy required is not about consciously developing a robust plan of action. But rather the presentation of an ability that allows you to change your mind mid-battle.

I see the ability to change party members on the fly as requiring less strategy than making decisions before a battle. In other words, FF10 does not as effectively induce a player to adapt and therefore deprives the player of depth perception. I think it's a design flaw that takes away a player's ability to understand the intricacies of game play since they don't have a greater pressure to do so (i.e. losing a battle). Instead, they lose a turn and that's not all that big a deal.

[Snips]

Originally Posted by [PhiberOpticks

;404301]I see the ability to change party members on the fly as requiring less strategy than making decisions before a battle. In other words, FF10 does not as effectively induce a player to adapt and therefore deprives the player of depth perception. I think it's a design flaw that takes away a player's ability to understand the intricacies of game play since they don't have a greater pressure to do so (i.e. losing a battle). Instead, they lose a turn and that's not all that big a deal.

I agree. Even more stupid is that only those who took action that battle get S.Levels, so you have to change in mid battle and defend for battles that should only take one turn, or be stuck with an underlevelled party.

[Don Chipotle]

Originally Posted by Lancet Jades

Keep this in mind. When you go around spouting how games suck, without qualifying it to some extent (and you often go do the opposite and insist they universally suck), you're no better than Droog. The same Droog we hate. The same Droog we loathe. The same Droog we shall someday bloody our hands by killing. Think about that for a moment. I'm sure you'd leap at the chance to become the very monster you hate, but c'mon, man, at least choose a better one than DROOG.

That seems a bit harsh, man. I can qualify my hatred for games.

[Lancet Jades]

Originally Posted by Don Chipotlé

That seems a bit harsh, man. I can qualify my hatred for games.

You hate games for being old, or for subjective reasons. You spew the hatred objectively. This is not a new argument or issue with you.

[Don Chipotle]

Originally Posted by Lancet Jades

You hate games for being old, or for subjective reasons. You spew the hatred objectively. This is not a new argument or issue with you.

I don't hate games for being old. I hate on older games because they aren't fun to play.


But now that I know that you loathe me, well asses to yall.

[Raist Classic]

Originally Posted by PhiberOpticks

A very valid point. And yet the kind of strategy required is not about consciously developing a robust plan of action. But rather the presentation of an ability that allows you to change your mind mid-battle.

I see the ability to change party members on the fly as requiring less strategy than making decisions before a battle. In other words, FF10 does not as effectively induce a player to adapt and therefore deprives the player of depth perception. I think it's a design flaw that takes away a player's ability to understand the intricacies of game play since they don't have a greater pressure to do so (i.e. losing a battle). Instead, they lose a turn and that's not all that big a deal.

Your wording in the second paragraph seems a little schizophrenic so I'm not really sure what you're saying, but FFX's system is more about tactics than strategy; that is to say, it requires you to adapt to situations as they present themselves, as opposed to knowing beforehand what you're going to fight, what equipment it's weak to, and how best to protect against the attacks it uses, all of which is usually impossible unless you've either read a guide or already lost before. Instead, you get a decent general setup and have to figure the rest out as it comes up, switching out characters and equipment (at a mild turn penalty) as it becomes necessary (and it is necessary). Honestly, I've probably gotten more equal use out of the characters in X than in any other jrpg I've played, and that's because their individuality is intrinsic to the highly tactical nature of the battle system. I see this as a great thing, both because it's more fun and because it greatly enhances the immersion of the game.

Also, status attacks that actually work and have a use. Who knew?

Originally Posted by Lancet Jades

You hate games for being old

Yeah that's not at all what he said.