Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

If you're a game developer, this is possibly the worst thing that could happen to you.

To be fair, Conan really only works well with Madden, CoD, and Gears of War games, where he can just flail around and act goofy.

Any JRPG, story telling, etc. he just fails at because he can't grasp it. I'm not defending FF15, I actually think it looks pretty meh (mainly the hold the attack button and move the stick to perform new attacks combat system), but I also don't see Conan as the type of guy to immerse himself in games.

Likewise, I think he'd absolutely suck at games like Dark Souls or Bloodborne.

He has said he doesn't really play or know anything about games, so yeah. Grain of salt. The point of these bits is for comedy, not to be serious reviews with insights on the subject.

If it is funny then it did what it set out to do really.

Yes, it's obvious going in that this is a comedy bit but he's spot on about the parts where they had to push the car and stand around talking about the wedding dress.

... I was expecting something slightly different from that, based on the thread title.

 Breotan wrote:
Yes, it's obvious going in that this is a comedy

And yet you still posited it as some sort honest destruction of the game.

 Breotan wrote:
but he's spot on about the parts where they had to push the car and stand around talking about the wedding dress.

So it is a modern (also known as terrible) JRPG. Color me shocked that a game about a girl group driving around summoning monsters and looking for hair product isn't all that good.

 toasteroven wrote:
... I was expecting something slightly different from that, based on the thread title.

Sorry about that. Was unintentional. I've updated the title with his last name.

He usually seems to be able to find the fun in the games he 'reviews' like the Witcher and Skyrim for example, but he clearly hated this.

And nobody was surprised.

Square-Enix has not developed a solid game in years. The latest success from them I guess would be FFXIV, but only after the most monumentally disastrous release in mmo history.

Why are people still thinking S-E is a quality company?

He's right though. When was the last time a FF game was good... Oh wait. Just kidding. I liked the first ones and the ones on the Nintendo DS.

But really, a LOT of people hate those games and don't want to play a 100 hours pushing cars and looking for hair products. Usually taking hours to even get somewhere remotely fun.

Giving Conan just a few hours to do this was just dumb if Square Enix asked him to do this.

This one was my favorite so far... I've seen this one... the Skyrim one when that game came out and also when the Tomb Raider reboot released... they're hilarious.

They should release pushing the car through the desert as a standalone game itself. Just EA franchise it with a new car with new guys to push it every year on the same road. Have stuff like hats or shirts or whatever as add on content and it'd be the best yearly released game on the market.

 n0t_u wrote:
They should release pushing the car through the desert as a standalone game itself. Just EA franchise it with a new car with new guys to push it every year on the same road. Have stuff like hats or shirts or whatever as add on content and it'd be the best yearly released game on the market.

Nah. Square-Enix doesn't need help bilking customers. Remember All the Bravest?

 curran12 wrote:

 n0t_u wrote:
They should release pushing the car through the desert as a standalone game itself. Just EA franchise it with a new car with new guys to push it every year on the same road. Have stuff like hats or shirts or whatever as add on content and it'd be the best yearly released game on the market.

Nah. Square-Enix doesn't need help bilking customers. Remember All the Bravest?

I think I may be fortunate as I've not heard of it. Also I was being partially serious, I'd at least have a little more quality than the yearly wwe, cod, madden, fifa, etc.

 n0t_u wrote:

 curran12 wrote:

 n0t_u wrote:
They should release pushing the car through the desert as a standalone game itself. Just EA franchise it with a new car with new guys to push it every year on the same road. Have stuff like hats or shirts or whatever as add on content and it'd be the best yearly released game on the market.

Nah. Square-Enix doesn't need help bilking customers. Remember All the Bravest?

I think I may be fortunate as I've not heard of it. Also I was being partially serious, I'd at least have a little more quality than the yearly wwe, cod, madden, fifa, etc.

http://kotaku.com/5976753/final-fantasy-all-the-bravest-is-46-of-in-app-purchases-looking-for-a-game

 curran12 wrote:
And nobody was surprised.

Square-Enix has not developed a solid game in years. The latest success from them I guess would be FFXIV, but only after the most monumentally disastrous release in mmo history.

Why are people still thinking S-E is a quality company?

Bravely Default is excellent if you're a fan of the old school Final Fantasy games. The Dragon Quest series has consistently delivered. I'm not into Kingdom Hearts but I've heard very few negative things from that community on the direction of the series, save maybe the infrequent releases.I wouldn't so easily dismiss FF14 because of the 1.0 Launch. The ARR relaunch has honestly been a pretty brilliant product. It offers an MMO with a lot of refined, accessible systems that isn't plagued by the over-streamlining that has hit WoW over the last few expansions or breaking totally from traditional systems. The setting is really one of the better ones I've seen in just about any game. It feels well detailed and alive without getting too mired in the "Dark Fantasy" trend that's become so popular with games like The Witcher and Dragon Age which so aren't my cup of tea.

I think this is an issue of audience. Square's products are still mostly well-regarded by people who have liked them all along. I think a lot of the crowd that jumped on FF7 when it was the totally hot property have long since grown tired of them. I mean this is a 40k forum it's a gaming forum filled with folks who like manly games with skulls and yelling and grim dark darkness and skulls and screaming and bald men and skulls. If you look a threads here in general tastes run strongly towards shooters, strategy games, and classic fantasy/sci-fi. The kind of stuff they make miniatures games out of.

10/10 would laugh again

 Chongara wrote:

 curran12 wrote:
And nobody was surprised.

Square-Enix has not developed a solid game in years. The latest success from them I guess would be FFXIV, but only after the most monumentally disastrous release in mmo history.

Why are people still thinking S-E is a quality company?

Bravely Default is excellent if you're a fan of the old school Final Fantasy games. The Dragon Quest series has consistently delivered. I'm not into Kingdom Hearts but I've heard very few negative things from that community on the direction of the series, save maybe the infrequent releases.I wouldn't so easily dismiss FF14 because of the 1.0 Launch. The ARR relaunch has honestly been a pretty brilliant product. It offers an MMO with a lot of refined, accessible systems that isn't plagued by the over-streamlining that has hit WoW over the last few expansions or breaking totally from traditional systems. The setting is really one of the better ones I've seen in just about any game. It feels well detailed and alive without getting too mired in the "Dark Fantasy" trend that's become so popular with games like The Witcher and Dragon Age which so aren't my cup of tea.

I think this is an issue of audience. Square's products are still mostly well-regarded by people who have liked them all along. I think a lot of the crowd that jumped on FF7 when it was the totally hot property have long since grown tired of them. I mean this is a 40k forum it's a gaming forum filled with folks who like manly games with skulls and yelling and grim dark darkness and skulls and screaming and bald men and skulls. If you look a threads here in general tastes run strongly towards shooters, strategy games, and classic fantasy/sci-fi. The kind of stuff they make miniatures games out of.

I've been a player of Square games since the NES era, and this is a bit of a well-worn rant from me, but to me the problems in their games started, in all places, at FF6 (3 in the US). Now don't get me wrong, it is the best game in the series in my eyes, but the problems with their games began with it. And it wasn't the story, but the gameplay that went first. FF6 was the first game where they just stopped caring about mechanically unique characters, which in turn made them wholly interchangeable. With FF6, your characters became nothing more than spell carriers, because that was by far the most effective way to play the game. This carried over into future games, where the characters didn't even pretend to be mechanically different outside of limit breaks. This is where the story started getting torn apart because instead of a cast of characters for protagonists, you had a cast of blank slates, and the story had to be loose enough to allow you to use whoever and loss of characters didn't matter. Let me give an example, FF4 had a lot of meaningful character deaths mostly because when those characters died, you were placed in a tough mechanical situation because "oh snap, I lost my main wizard who was heals". On the other hand, FF7 when Aeris died your situation really didn't change. The character was bland and weightless, which carried over into the story because nothing had any meaningful impact.

Now that's FF, and a long tangent.

As far as the rest of SE's line. Kingdom Hearts is in a weird place, it has solid gameplay and great presentation...but it suffers from one of the worst and most poorly-written stories in the history of fiction. Rather than attempt to explain it, I'll just put this here: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B8cPyvE2GTjOMzE4MTVlZTctMjE5Yi00YzAzLWJjZTAtZTllODY2OTc2MTMx/edit?hl=en_US

As far as Dragon Quest, a main line game hasn't been released in almost 7 years. That's hardly signs of a vibrant franchise.

Bravely Default I tried, but I never got into. I think it was a combination of the art style and the pretty engaging characters. I didn't get too far, but I do remember a conversation between the main guy and the first girl going something like this:

Agnes: I MUST DO THIS ALONE
Hero guy: But I can help you, you know, like I just totally helped you back there?
Agnes: ALONE.EXE
Fairy companion: Hey Agnes, this guy is probably the guy in the prophecy who is supposed to help you
Agnes: DON'T CARE BECAUSE I'M THICK

That all said, I'm also the grump who hated a Link Between Worlds, so I might not be the best judge of handheld rpgs.

Really hard to take your rant seriously since you punctuate with the bizarre remark that Aerith's death didn't matter.

 curran12 wrote:
I've been a player of Square games since the NES era, and this is a bit of a well-worn rant from me, but to me the problems in their games started, in all places, at FF6 (3 in the US). Now don't get me wrong, it is the best game in the series in my eyes, but the problems with their games began with it. And it wasn't the story, but the gameplay that went first. FF6 was the first game where they just stopped caring about mechanically unique characters, which in turn made them wholly interchangeable. With FF6, your characters became nothing more than spell carriers, because that was by far the most effective way to play the game. This carried over into future games, where the characters didn't even pretend to be mechanically different outside of limit breaks. This is where the story started getting torn apart because instead of a cast of characters for protagonists, you had a cast of blank slates, and the story had to be loose enough to allow you to use whoever and loss of characters didn't matter. Let me give an example, FF4 had a lot of meaningful character deaths mostly because when those characters died, you were placed in a tough mechanical situation because "oh snap, I lost my main wizard who was heals". On the other hand, FF7 when Aeris died your situation really didn't change. The character was bland and weightless, which carried over into the story because nothing had any meaningful impact.

This wasn't a change in Final Fantasy 6. Final Fantasy 1, 3 & 5 were all build-your-own-party affairs with 3 & 5 allowing to you swap classes among characters at any time. Final Fantasy 2 oddball that it was also let you train any character to be anything you want. In terms of the games that took place before 6, 4 was anomaly in terms of giving you class-locked characters that moved in & out of the party independent of your control. The characters in 7, 8, 10 & 12 with minor stat variations and specific limit breaks are arguably more mechanically diversified than any of the earlier games save 4. The only other game to really lock in distinct character mechanics was 9 and that still gave you redundant classes and let you swap them in or out as you pleased.

You seem to be picking a trait very peculiar to Final Fantasy 4 and generalizing it as some trait the series always carried that was later abandoned. From a narrative standpoint on character deaths in 4
(spoilers warings for an SNES-era game I guess?

As far as the rest of SE's line. Kingdom Hearts is in a weird place, it has solid gameplay and great presentation...but it suffers from one of the worst and most poorly-written stories in the history of fiction. Rather than attempt to explain it, I'll just put this here: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B8cPyvE2GTjOMzE4MTVlZTctMjE5Yi00YzAzLWJjZTAtZTllODY2OTc2MTMx/edit?hl=en_US
As far as Dragon Quest, a main line game hasn't been released in almost 7 years. That's hardly signs of a vibrant franchise.

Never really played them, can't say. I mean the audience for it seems to be very happy with it. I personally can't stand what I've seen of them, but then again I can't stand lots of things.

The last main line dragon quest game was released in late 2012 just over 4 years ago. Sure it didn't get a US release but you'd have to fault like 80% of the series on that standard. However it was well recieved by both critics & fans, as well as being a commercial success where it was released.

Bravely Default I tried, but I never got into. I think it was a combination of the art style and the pretty engaging characters. I didn't get too far, but I do remember a conversation between the main guy and the first girl going something like this:

It's not a game without faults and Agnes is certainly one of them.

Final Fantasy VII is a mediocre FF game.

Bravely Default was very well done.

Until SE brings the online DQ (DQ X) game to NA they will continue to get the side-eye.

Kingdom Hearts was a fun and interesting game that almost immediately started going off the rails after the first one. NSFW due to salty language Youtube video.

I agree FFVII is overhyped as hell.
I liked 4 a lot more.

Personally I quite enjoyed VIII. I've only played 7,8,10,10-2 and 13. I'm actually looking forward to this one, and the XII remake. I heard a lot of good things about it, but I never played it.

This new FF is like a Witcher 3 "JRPG version". I am pumped as hell for it. Heck, I wanted a PS4 and instead of taking advantage of Black Friday deals, I'm getting the PS4 Slim FF Limited Edition

 TheDraconicLord wrote:
This new FF is like a Witcher 3 "JRPG version".

Unless that means "not at all like Witcher III" I have my doubts.

 Ahtman wrote:

 TheDraconicLord wrote:
This new FF is like a Witcher 3 "JRPG version".

Unless that means "not at all like Witcher III" I have my doubts.

Ok, doing my best to explain it:

- The real time combat, that'll make you switch between different weapons, dodge, parry, counter, and magic. You have your party and you see in mutiple gameplay Noctis zipping around between enemies, as I had to do several times in witcher, attempting to dodge enemies and striking when I could.

- A massive open world with over 200 sidequests and many different towns to explore, all open from the start.

- There's even "alchemy", that's achieved by Ignis' cooking and you level up by resting.

- I'm not going to compare plots, but this is the kind of plot I like, it looks straightforward like IV or XII: Get your throne back, kick the other empire's ass while doing it.

Yes, I could have used other games for the comparison, I'm sorry if it sounded confusing with the Witcher III thing =/