Kkissa
One of the best simple games ever made. But the Microsoft versions (until windows 7, the ones I played) allows for too much 50/50s. Is it that hard for the computer to generate a seed that doesn't allow 50/50s?
2002
[Best characteristics of the game]==================================================
1. One of the few playstation titles using pre-rendered graphics that aged well. The game’s graphics and overall art direction are too charming. It is due to the use of 2D sprites alongside a pre-rendered always in the same angle (isometric). The art direction is uncannily good, having random human objects and integrated circuits being part of “nature”. Nevertheless, it does not apply for the battles;
2. Musically, this game is on par with behemoths like Castlevania Symphony of the Night and Donkey Kong Country 2. The soundtrack here is amazing;
3. I love that any digimon can digivolve into any other digimon, it takes away the “knock off pokemon clone” atmosphere the digimon saga may get. Here you stay only with the digimon you picked in the beginning until the end, you will be always anxious about in what they will transform after they get stronger;
4. Digimon, storywise, NEEDS to be about a digital world created and acknowledged by human society, it doesn’t fit it being a “secret thing” since everything digital in our world must have been created by humans. This game hit the target by making Digimon an MMO (storywise), because this would be the logical explanation for it being a “digital world” with creatures with completely unnatural designs (like Weregarurumon wearing pants).
5. The card game here is insanely good... really, the only RPG in which I got really invested in the option card game, and I played Final Fantasy 8 and The Witcher 3.
[Worst characteristic of the game]==================================================
1.This is my favorite bad game… and I say bad because this game have one characteristic that makes it almost unplayable. The devs went for the easiest route to add playtime, and that is brain rot backtracking; not backtracking done by the player because now the player can access something he couldn’t before, no… backtracking STORY-WISE, to get ONE SPEECH BALOON worth of dialogue from a NPC and do the route all over again.
This game have an insane high random encounter rate (it uses random battles) and the story CONSTANTLY makes you talk with NPCs at complete opposite points of the map, just to make you spend time with random battles through the whole map to increase the time played without doing any new maps for that. What adds salt to the injury is that those NPCs doesn’t give you anything, they are there just so you can talk to another NPC at the other edge of the map again. DON’T PLAY THIS GAME without some kind of Mod that turns On and Off random battles, the devs doesn’t deserve that this game is played “how it was intended”. This backtracking complete ruins ANY good characteristic this game have.
1. One of the few playstation titles using pre-rendered graphics that aged well. The game’s graphics and overall art direction are too charming. It is due to the use of 2D sprites alongside a pre-rendered always in the same angle (isometric). The art direction is uncannily good, having random human objects and integrated circuits being part of “nature”. Nevertheless, it does not apply for the battles;
2. Musically, this game is on par with behemoths like Castlevania Symphony of the Night and Donkey Kong Country 2. The soundtrack here is amazing;
3. I love that any digimon can digivolve into any other digimon, it takes away the “knock off pokemon clone” atmosphere the digimon saga may get. Here you stay only with the digimon you picked in the beginning until the end, you will be always anxious about in what they will transform after they get stronger;
4. Digimon, storywise, NEEDS to be about a digital world created and acknowledged by human society, it doesn’t fit it being a “secret thing” since everything digital in our world must have been created by humans. This game hit the target by making Digimon an MMO (storywise), because this would be the logical explanation for it being a “digital world” with creatures with completely unnatural designs (like Weregarurumon wearing pants).
5. The card game here is insanely good... really, the only RPG in which I got really invested in the option card game, and I played Final Fantasy 8 and The Witcher 3.
[Worst characteristic of the game]==================================================
1.This is my favorite bad game… and I say bad because this game have one characteristic that makes it almost unplayable. The devs went for the easiest route to add playtime, and that is brain rot backtracking; not backtracking done by the player because now the player can access something he couldn’t before, no… backtracking STORY-WISE, to get ONE SPEECH BALOON worth of dialogue from a NPC and do the route all over again.
This game have an insane high random encounter rate (it uses random battles) and the story CONSTANTLY makes you talk with NPCs at complete opposite points of the map, just to make you spend time with random battles through the whole map to increase the time played without doing any new maps for that. What adds salt to the injury is that those NPCs doesn’t give you anything, they are there just so you can talk to another NPC at the other edge of the map again. DON’T PLAY THIS GAME without some kind of Mod that turns On and Off random battles, the devs doesn’t deserve that this game is played “how it was intended”. This backtracking complete ruins ANY good characteristic this game have.
1997
Bomberman is a series of games that is its own genre, and the most impressive thing is the lack of copycats, or inspired “like” titles (such as “soulslike”). If you want to play a game of the Bomberman genre, your only option is to pick a Bomberman title.
For this reason I simply cannot leave at least one Bomberman title from my top 10, I cannot leave a whole good videogame genre away from it. That is why I decided the best bomberman game will be my #10 best game I have played, and this one is Super Bomberman 5.
[Good characteristics of the game]=================================================
1. Very big scope for a game in the Bomberman series, both in story mode and in Battle mode. The story mode can be rushed on and can take days to finish it all (and points for being non-linear). While the battle mode comes with many different modes, covering absolutely anything you may want to do, you can even personalize your own bombermans, both in terms of looks and power ups.
2. Bomber man bosses actually tries to win and play really really well. You will have a hard time fighting them; they are not braindead easy like the ones in Super Bomber Man 4.
[Bad characteristics of the game]==================================================
1. Only single-screen stages.
For this reason I simply cannot leave at least one Bomberman title from my top 10, I cannot leave a whole good videogame genre away from it. That is why I decided the best bomberman game will be my #10 best game I have played, and this one is Super Bomberman 5.
[Good characteristics of the game]=================================================
1. Very big scope for a game in the Bomberman series, both in story mode and in Battle mode. The story mode can be rushed on and can take days to finish it all (and points for being non-linear). While the battle mode comes with many different modes, covering absolutely anything you may want to do, you can even personalize your own bombermans, both in terms of looks and power ups.
2. Bomber man bosses actually tries to win and play really really well. You will have a hard time fighting them; they are not braindead easy like the ones in Super Bomber Man 4.
[Bad characteristics of the game]==================================================
1. Only single-screen stages.
2011
I never score a game based on what it represented for the time, I always score based of how much a game holds nowadays. That is why I always give NES games, does not matter how important and good they were for their time, a low score (with the exception of Zelda II).
Dark Souls 1, however, carry two features that no other game of the genre tried to replicate, and that is the verisimilitude aspect of the world with the gameplay and the level design, making it still an enjoyable experience for what it have as "different" from the following games that are or should be better. Still making this first title an experience of its own.
[Best characteristics of the game]==================================================
1. Very well executed metroidvania-like map made for a 3D game;
2. To this day, the most grounded soulsborne title in terms of gameplay (and yes, that includes passive poise and the fact that defense stat matters, exactly how it would be in real life). It gives more satisfaction when killing giant monsters, because you are closer to how a medieval knight would really move and what would really use against a dragon for example. Dark Souls 1 is your way to go If you would like to experience a “more realistic” soulsborne. Add the amazing animation of "not having enough strengh to wield this weapon" that only this game have (for some reason) to this. Also adds the fact that this game have almost no crazy big weapon or crazy moveset or crazy big magic that games like Dark Souls 3 and Elden Ring are full of.
[Good characteristics of the game]=================================================
1. Souslborne gameplay: it means having an omnipresent stamina bar. Any action that takes effort, being attacking, defending, running, jumping, parrying and dodging eats from the same stamina bar, exactly like in the real world, and actions like holding a defense and using a ladder makes the stamina bar recharge slow. This adds to the realism those games craves and prevents any action spamming by the player;
2. Soulsborne online interactivity: Summoning players, being invaded, seeing people playing right now, Covenants.
3. The game’s narrative fits perfectly with every aspect of the gameplay. Unfortunately, it only works well for the games of the Dark Souls trilogy (Unfortunately for the other From Software games that makes use of such gameplay aspects).
[Bad characteristics of the game]==================================================
1. Lost Izalith map;
2. Demon ruins map;
3. The game let you take a wrong route in the beginning, no problem with that. The problem is not having a shortcut at the end back to Firelink Shrine, this would have made your forced progress at least useful for later.
Dark Souls 1, however, carry two features that no other game of the genre tried to replicate, and that is the verisimilitude aspect of the world with the gameplay and the level design, making it still an enjoyable experience for what it have as "different" from the following games that are or should be better. Still making this first title an experience of its own.
[Best characteristics of the game]==================================================
1. Very well executed metroidvania-like map made for a 3D game;
2. To this day, the most grounded soulsborne title in terms of gameplay (and yes, that includes passive poise and the fact that defense stat matters, exactly how it would be in real life). It gives more satisfaction when killing giant monsters, because you are closer to how a medieval knight would really move and what would really use against a dragon for example. Dark Souls 1 is your way to go If you would like to experience a “more realistic” soulsborne. Add the amazing animation of "not having enough strengh to wield this weapon" that only this game have (for some reason) to this. Also adds the fact that this game have almost no crazy big weapon or crazy moveset or crazy big magic that games like Dark Souls 3 and Elden Ring are full of.
[Good characteristics of the game]=================================================
1. Souslborne gameplay: it means having an omnipresent stamina bar. Any action that takes effort, being attacking, defending, running, jumping, parrying and dodging eats from the same stamina bar, exactly like in the real world, and actions like holding a defense and using a ladder makes the stamina bar recharge slow. This adds to the realism those games craves and prevents any action spamming by the player;
2. Soulsborne online interactivity: Summoning players, being invaded, seeing people playing right now, Covenants.
3. The game’s narrative fits perfectly with every aspect of the gameplay. Unfortunately, it only works well for the games of the Dark Souls trilogy (Unfortunately for the other From Software games that makes use of such gameplay aspects).
[Bad characteristics of the game]==================================================
1. Lost Izalith map;
2. Demon ruins map;
3. The game let you take a wrong route in the beginning, no problem with that. The problem is not having a shortcut at the end back to Firelink Shrine, this would have made your forced progress at least useful for later.
2008
Good things about this game:
1. Bomberman gameplay.
Bad things about this game:
1. I played the japanese version and its story mode and it is completely inexcusable how it pales in comparison to the story mode of the Snes titles. This is supposed to be the Bomberman for the Wii, a far more capable console than the Snes, but it does extremelly less. The story mode of the japanese version is extremely bland, short, linear, uninspired and with NO NEW IDEA implemented. It feels impossible playing this game after playing the story mode of a game like Super Bomberman 3, 4 or 5 on the Snes (mainly Super Bomberman 5);
2. Nowadays this game is even worse graphically, because while the Snes games have aged well graphically due to being 2D, this one is just an ugly wii era 3D.
3. The international version dropped the story mode to have just the battle mode, it means even less content. Unfortunately, this is a game with an expiration date. Outside of the Wii we have real options of playing Bomberman online nowadays. I hoped the japanese version story mode could justify its existence nowadays.
1. Bomberman gameplay.
Bad things about this game:
1. I played the japanese version and its story mode and it is completely inexcusable how it pales in comparison to the story mode of the Snes titles. This is supposed to be the Bomberman for the Wii, a far more capable console than the Snes, but it does extremelly less. The story mode of the japanese version is extremely bland, short, linear, uninspired and with NO NEW IDEA implemented. It feels impossible playing this game after playing the story mode of a game like Super Bomberman 3, 4 or 5 on the Snes (mainly Super Bomberman 5);
2. Nowadays this game is even worse graphically, because while the Snes games have aged well graphically due to being 2D, this one is just an ugly wii era 3D.
3. The international version dropped the story mode to have just the battle mode, it means even less content. Unfortunately, this is a game with an expiration date. Outside of the Wii we have real options of playing Bomberman online nowadays. I hoped the japanese version story mode could justify its existence nowadays.
1984
It was interesting playing this game, it feels like a beta concept of "the RPG table game turned into an eletronic game", that is why it was interesting.
And I managed to finish it without save states or a guide, so I don't hate this game.
And I managed to finish it without save states or a guide, so I don't hate this game.
2004
Best characteristics of the game:
1. I have played Megaman 5, 6, X4, X5, X6, X8, Zero, Zero 2, Zero 3, Zero 4, ZX and ZX Advent. And it was only in Megaman Zero 3 that I was hooked into the story. In all the other games the story was just an excuse for the gameplay, but not here. By hooking the player the story does something that almost no platformer does;
2. Now about the gameplay... imagine the "Megaman X6 fun Zero gameplay" that you "achieve" after forcing yourself to speedrun that terrible game, now imagine having that but in a legitimately good megaman game and having even more gameplay options to f*ck around as Zero;
3. Grinding at the right amount (this is difficult for any game to get right);
4. As it is with the Zero series, after completing a level, the game's level kind of "open themselves" for the player, since those games are a mix of "level base game" and "metroidvania".
Bad characteristics of the game:
1. The good stuff of this game isn't exactly "merit" of this game. The story only works because it is a direct sequel to Zero 2 and 1, you won't be able to be hooked into the story if you don't have knowledge of Zero 2, Zero 1 and the X series. The gameplay is a little improvement to what Zero 2 and Zero 1 and the X series were working on. So, even though I can't "think" of a bad thing about the game, the good things aren't exclusive merit of this game, so I can't call it a "perfect" game, but I can call it a perfect megaman game.
1. I have played Megaman 5, 6, X4, X5, X6, X8, Zero, Zero 2, Zero 3, Zero 4, ZX and ZX Advent. And it was only in Megaman Zero 3 that I was hooked into the story. In all the other games the story was just an excuse for the gameplay, but not here. By hooking the player the story does something that almost no platformer does;
2. Now about the gameplay... imagine the "Megaman X6 fun Zero gameplay" that you "achieve" after forcing yourself to speedrun that terrible game, now imagine having that but in a legitimately good megaman game and having even more gameplay options to f*ck around as Zero;
3. Grinding at the right amount (this is difficult for any game to get right);
4. As it is with the Zero series, after completing a level, the game's level kind of "open themselves" for the player, since those games are a mix of "level base game" and "metroidvania".
Bad characteristics of the game:
1. The good stuff of this game isn't exactly "merit" of this game. The story only works because it is a direct sequel to Zero 2 and 1, you won't be able to be hooked into the story if you don't have knowledge of Zero 2, Zero 1 and the X series. The gameplay is a little improvement to what Zero 2 and Zero 1 and the X series were working on. So, even though I can't "think" of a bad thing about the game, the good things aren't exclusive merit of this game, so I can't call it a "perfect" game, but I can call it a perfect megaman game.
2020
Best characteristic of the game:
1. Simply the best piece of media in the whole "terror genre" between all medias I have experienced to date, and it does that without any cliche of the genre;
2. The game doesn't allow itself to get something wrong by being extremely short.
Bad characteristics of the game:
1. The game doesn't allow itself to get something wrong by being extremely short.
1. Simply the best piece of media in the whole "terror genre" between all medias I have experienced to date, and it does that without any cliche of the genre;
2. The game doesn't allow itself to get something wrong by being extremely short.
Bad characteristics of the game:
1. The game doesn't allow itself to get something wrong by being extremely short.
2022
[Best characteristics of the game]==================================================
1. This game did what MMORPGs tried to do their whole existence: form a RPG party of unknown people with different equipment and adventure so far against the big powerful monster, who is too much for one warrior alone. Elden Ring had no fear in allowing you to skip the majority of its content; it makes the adventure of each player unique to one another. When two adventures meet to fight the big monster, they will have different equipment and different spells, unknown to the other, due to the different adventures and different places they have being until now, exactly how it should be in a medieval fantasy scenario, and this is only achievable by allowing the player to miss stuff, big and small.
2. World map designed to its elemental minimal details. There are no wasted spaces in this giant map; and if there are, they were thought to be empty spaces for a reason.
[Good characteristics of the game]=================================================
1. Souslborne gameplay: it means having an omnipresent stamina bar. Any action that takes effort, being attacking, defending, running, jumping, parrying and dodging eats from the same stamina bar, exactly like in the real world, and actions like holding a defense and using a ladder makes the stamina bar recharge slow. This adds to the realism those games craves and prevents any action spamming by the player;
2. Soulsborne online interactivity: Summoning players, being invaded, seeing people playing right now, PVP arena.
[Bad characteristics of the game]==================================================
1. The lack of verisimilitude in order to boost the "rule of cool" dropped me off many times. Dark Souls 1 did the exact opposite: sacrificing the "Rule of cool" to add in the verisimilitude department;
2. The magic of fighting bosses fades away once you realize they are just a bunch of oversized enemies doing nothing but trying to roll catch the player by pre-defined combos. It makes them feel like a memorization chore;
3. The same problem Sekiro had: The world CLAIMED to be a more vivid world, but to appeal to the soulsborne aesthetics (even though this is a new IP and didn't need to appeal to that), we play in a dead world, no towns, no NPCs living their lives, no economy to watch, no common placed cutscenes...;
4. Too much oversized and overcompensating magic and weapon skills, killing the fun online PVP through invasions could have.
1. This game did what MMORPGs tried to do their whole existence: form a RPG party of unknown people with different equipment and adventure so far against the big powerful monster, who is too much for one warrior alone. Elden Ring had no fear in allowing you to skip the majority of its content; it makes the adventure of each player unique to one another. When two adventures meet to fight the big monster, they will have different equipment and different spells, unknown to the other, due to the different adventures and different places they have being until now, exactly how it should be in a medieval fantasy scenario, and this is only achievable by allowing the player to miss stuff, big and small.
2. World map designed to its elemental minimal details. There are no wasted spaces in this giant map; and if there are, they were thought to be empty spaces for a reason.
[Good characteristics of the game]=================================================
1. Souslborne gameplay: it means having an omnipresent stamina bar. Any action that takes effort, being attacking, defending, running, jumping, parrying and dodging eats from the same stamina bar, exactly like in the real world, and actions like holding a defense and using a ladder makes the stamina bar recharge slow. This adds to the realism those games craves and prevents any action spamming by the player;
2. Soulsborne online interactivity: Summoning players, being invaded, seeing people playing right now, PVP arena.
[Bad characteristics of the game]==================================================
1. The lack of verisimilitude in order to boost the "rule of cool" dropped me off many times. Dark Souls 1 did the exact opposite: sacrificing the "Rule of cool" to add in the verisimilitude department;
2. The magic of fighting bosses fades away once you realize they are just a bunch of oversized enemies doing nothing but trying to roll catch the player by pre-defined combos. It makes them feel like a memorization chore;
3. The same problem Sekiro had: The world CLAIMED to be a more vivid world, but to appeal to the soulsborne aesthetics (even though this is a new IP and didn't need to appeal to that), we play in a dead world, no towns, no NPCs living their lives, no economy to watch, no common placed cutscenes...;
4. Too much oversized and overcompensating magic and weapon skills, killing the fun online PVP through invasions could have.
Good things about the game:
1. Best fantastic medieval Japanese atmosphere in a video game. The difficulty lives up to this kind of atmosphere popularized by games like Tenchu and Ninja Gaiden;
2. Rhythmic combat in the right amount, so, short, being a short game. This is a purelly passive rhythmic combat, it wouldn't sustain itself if the game was longer, I believe Myazaki noticed that;
3. Second best "metroidvania-like" map in the soulsborne. After Dark Souls 1 this is the best 3D map with connections, even though it doesn't do that very often.
Bad things about the game:
1. This game dropped the soulsborne gameplay, so why it insisted in other stuff that only works there? Felt like the game was begging to have more stuff, like some hub-medieval-japanese-towns that were non hostile for the player, more cutscenes, be more like a "normal game" since it was dropping the soulsborne style of narrative (cutscenes here have NPCs talking to each other, in the soulsborne NPCs never directly talked to each other in front of the player, the fact that they to that here means the game was trying to get away from the soulsborne) and dropping the soulsborne gameplay completely. I am complaining basically about the lack of a living world in favor of a dead world like the soulsborne's during gameplay, because the narrative and its context called for the presence of a living world, more populous, more habitable; while the gameplay gave the player a dead world, just to appeal to the souldborne style... without any necessity to appeal to that.
1. Best fantastic medieval Japanese atmosphere in a video game. The difficulty lives up to this kind of atmosphere popularized by games like Tenchu and Ninja Gaiden;
2. Rhythmic combat in the right amount, so, short, being a short game. This is a purelly passive rhythmic combat, it wouldn't sustain itself if the game was longer, I believe Myazaki noticed that;
3. Second best "metroidvania-like" map in the soulsborne. After Dark Souls 1 this is the best 3D map with connections, even though it doesn't do that very often.
Bad things about the game:
1. This game dropped the soulsborne gameplay, so why it insisted in other stuff that only works there? Felt like the game was begging to have more stuff, like some hub-medieval-japanese-towns that were non hostile for the player, more cutscenes, be more like a "normal game" since it was dropping the soulsborne style of narrative (cutscenes here have NPCs talking to each other, in the soulsborne NPCs never directly talked to each other in front of the player, the fact that they to that here means the game was trying to get away from the soulsborne) and dropping the soulsborne gameplay completely. I am complaining basically about the lack of a living world in favor of a dead world like the soulsborne's during gameplay, because the narrative and its context called for the presence of a living world, more populous, more habitable; while the gameplay gave the player a dead world, just to appeal to the souldborne style... without any necessity to appeal to that.
This review contains spoilers
[Best characteristics of the game]==================================================
1. This is simply the best action-RPG combat in which you are at the control of a whole party. The main difference between an Action-RPG to a turn based-RPG is that the turn based one allow you to have full control over an entire party, without the aid of any kind of A.I. for you; that's why action RPGs are usually a lonely journey (The Witcher, Skyrim, Dark Souls... all just one character, no party). This game, however, balanced the action RPG playstyle with a party at the control of the player perfectly. It lets you switch very faster between every character, and their actions takes enough time for you to give actions to all the remaining characters. In addition, the A.I. only defends, and it is way better than you at defending, making it a COMPLETE passive tool for you instead of an A.I. ally, exactly how it should be;
2. The story ADDS to the original's story. 95% of the story was improved from the original. Few of it the original did better;
3. Music is phenomenal.
[Bad things about the game] =====================================================
1. Constant neglecting the verisimilitude factor in cutscenes. For example, the characters stand out in the crowd CONSTANTLY by the weapons they carry and by the way they dress, but it almost never is a problem somehow, even though they need to be sneaking in and out of places. This took me off many times.
For example, how would I “fix” this verisimilitude issue. For the missions that needed the party to take the train, Barret could wear a full worker's jumpsuit that match his pants over his jacket and a backpack where his gun arm would be, in his arm he could wear a fake broken arm in plaster, the military would easily take him as a random worker who has injured himself.
After they are out of the train, Barret would throw the plaster out, take his gun out of the backpack and put it in his hand, while also taking the upperpart of the fake jumpsuit out, revealing his jacket. Cloud could wear any shirt over his and carry his sword inside those things musicians carry their giant instrument, he would carry it still in his back. His sword and his shoulder metal thing would be inside it.
2. The “robot hand” section takes too long;
3. Too much anime vices.
4. [SPOILER] About the Story:
4.1. The original game build up the best plot twist in the history of videogames and this first instalment of the Remake blew it with a scene with Hojo;
4.2. The original sacrificed the population under the Plate that fell, but in this game the heroes had to evacuate the area and save everyone, killing an important plot point the original had build up about Shin-Ra and the world the characters were living in. Now you don’t feel that anything is at stakes anymore.
4.3. Rufus Shinra was supposed to be a “normal” guy. The original game masterfully made him a normal guy who can’t find super powerful beings through his boss fight, but he is not “useless” in the battle department because he have resources:
In the original, he fights alongside a monster because it is the monster who does the fighting. He starts the battle already with the barrier materia on him because this is the game’s way of saying “this is how this normal dude is not one shot by Cloud’s blows”, and he uses a shotgun because a gun is the most powerful ranged weapon for a normal guy. He could “fight” with Cloud because of his resources alone, not because Rufus can fight SOLDIER level people.
However, in the remake, all of this was thrown out of the window and now Rufus is somehow stronger than the first class SOLDIER that he employs… I mean, what the fuck? You just destroyed what the original accomplished with Rufus Shinra, not only that but what is the logic of Rufus calling “elite” SOLDIER people who are weaker than him?
1. This is simply the best action-RPG combat in which you are at the control of a whole party. The main difference between an Action-RPG to a turn based-RPG is that the turn based one allow you to have full control over an entire party, without the aid of any kind of A.I. for you; that's why action RPGs are usually a lonely journey (The Witcher, Skyrim, Dark Souls... all just one character, no party). This game, however, balanced the action RPG playstyle with a party at the control of the player perfectly. It lets you switch very faster between every character, and their actions takes enough time for you to give actions to all the remaining characters. In addition, the A.I. only defends, and it is way better than you at defending, making it a COMPLETE passive tool for you instead of an A.I. ally, exactly how it should be;
2. The story ADDS to the original's story. 95% of the story was improved from the original. Few of it the original did better;
3. Music is phenomenal.
[Bad things about the game] =====================================================
1. Constant neglecting the verisimilitude factor in cutscenes. For example, the characters stand out in the crowd CONSTANTLY by the weapons they carry and by the way they dress, but it almost never is a problem somehow, even though they need to be sneaking in and out of places. This took me off many times.
For example, how would I “fix” this verisimilitude issue. For the missions that needed the party to take the train, Barret could wear a full worker's jumpsuit that match his pants over his jacket and a backpack where his gun arm would be, in his arm he could wear a fake broken arm in plaster, the military would easily take him as a random worker who has injured himself.
After they are out of the train, Barret would throw the plaster out, take his gun out of the backpack and put it in his hand, while also taking the upperpart of the fake jumpsuit out, revealing his jacket. Cloud could wear any shirt over his and carry his sword inside those things musicians carry their giant instrument, he would carry it still in his back. His sword and his shoulder metal thing would be inside it.
2. The “robot hand” section takes too long;
3. Too much anime vices.
4. [SPOILER] About the Story:
4.1. The original game build up the best plot twist in the history of videogames and this first instalment of the Remake blew it with a scene with Hojo;
4.2. The original sacrificed the population under the Plate that fell, but in this game the heroes had to evacuate the area and save everyone, killing an important plot point the original had build up about Shin-Ra and the world the characters were living in. Now you don’t feel that anything is at stakes anymore.
4.3. Rufus Shinra was supposed to be a “normal” guy. The original game masterfully made him a normal guy who can’t find super powerful beings through his boss fight, but he is not “useless” in the battle department because he have resources:
In the original, he fights alongside a monster because it is the monster who does the fighting. He starts the battle already with the barrier materia on him because this is the game’s way of saying “this is how this normal dude is not one shot by Cloud’s blows”, and he uses a shotgun because a gun is the most powerful ranged weapon for a normal guy. He could “fight” with Cloud because of his resources alone, not because Rufus can fight SOLDIER level people.
However, in the remake, all of this was thrown out of the window and now Rufus is somehow stronger than the first class SOLDIER that he employs… I mean, what the fuck? You just destroyed what the original accomplished with Rufus Shinra, not only that but what is the logic of Rufus calling “elite” SOLDIER people who are weaker than him?
Best caracteristic of the game:
1. The game gives you complete freedom to how a party unit would function, so much freedom that it can make the notion of a party useless for you, needing only this one character even with him at the same level of the enemy party. This, by default, also gives you complete control of how your party will funcion for you, or how it will not function. Other tactics games implemented the notion of "races" to limit the number of classes your units can be, prioritizing the management of the party and hurting the management of the individual unit; in those cases the "party" becomes the character. That is why this one still feels so superior in comparison to the GBA and NDS ones, because one single unit can have and can be everything.
Good characteristics of the game:
1. Story;
2. The fact that combat takes into consideration the speed of the character and not the turn of the player;
3. This game doesn't function like one player and its units against other plater (the CPU) and its units, the enemy plays like he is a real character. For example: monsters don't sacrifice themselves in order to defeat your party, if a monster is low on health, he will run, even thought it seems obvious to sacrifice this unit to hurt your party. This happens because monsters plays like real living beings, not wanting to die, and not like pieces in a chess board played by one mastermind. This seems like a small feature, but those kind of small things adds to the experience.
Bad things about the game:
1- Low effort by the CPU in arming their human units, both in terms of skills and equipment.
1. The game gives you complete freedom to how a party unit would function, so much freedom that it can make the notion of a party useless for you, needing only this one character even with him at the same level of the enemy party. This, by default, also gives you complete control of how your party will funcion for you, or how it will not function. Other tactics games implemented the notion of "races" to limit the number of classes your units can be, prioritizing the management of the party and hurting the management of the individual unit; in those cases the "party" becomes the character. That is why this one still feels so superior in comparison to the GBA and NDS ones, because one single unit can have and can be everything.
Good characteristics of the game:
1. Story;
2. The fact that combat takes into consideration the speed of the character and not the turn of the player;
3. This game doesn't function like one player and its units against other plater (the CPU) and its units, the enemy plays like he is a real character. For example: monsters don't sacrifice themselves in order to defeat your party, if a monster is low on health, he will run, even thought it seems obvious to sacrifice this unit to hurt your party. This happens because monsters plays like real living beings, not wanting to die, and not like pieces in a chess board played by one mastermind. This seems like a small feature, but those kind of small things adds to the experience.
Bad things about the game:
1- Low effort by the CPU in arming their human units, both in terms of skills and equipment.
Best caracteristic of the game:
1. The game gives you complete freedom to how a party unit would function, so much freedom that it can make the notion of a party useless for you, needing only this one character even with him at the same level of the enemy party. This, by default, also gives you complete control of how your party will funcion for you, or how it will not function. Other tactics games implemented the notion of "races" to limit the number of classes your units can be, prioritizing the management of the party and hurting the management of the individual unit; in those cases the "party" becomes the character. That is why this one still feels so superior in comparison to the GBA and NDS ones, because one single unit can have and can be everything.
Good characteristics of the game:
1. Story;
2. The fact that combat takes into consideration the speed of the character and not the turn of the player;
3. This game doesn't function like one player and its units against other plater (the CPU) and its units, the enemy plays like he is a real character. For example: monsters don't sacrifice themselves in order to defeat your party, if a monster is low on health, he will run, even thought it seems obvious to sacrifice this unit to hurt your party. This happens because monsters plays like real living beings, not wanting to die, and not like pieces in a chess board played by one mastermind. This seems like a small feature, but those kind of small things adds to the experience.
Bad things about the game:
1- Low effort by the CPU in arming their human units, both in terms of skills and equipment.
1. The game gives you complete freedom to how a party unit would function, so much freedom that it can make the notion of a party useless for you, needing only this one character even with him at the same level of the enemy party. This, by default, also gives you complete control of how your party will funcion for you, or how it will not function. Other tactics games implemented the notion of "races" to limit the number of classes your units can be, prioritizing the management of the party and hurting the management of the individual unit; in those cases the "party" becomes the character. That is why this one still feels so superior in comparison to the GBA and NDS ones, because one single unit can have and can be everything.
Good characteristics of the game:
1. Story;
2. The fact that combat takes into consideration the speed of the character and not the turn of the player;
3. This game doesn't function like one player and its units against other plater (the CPU) and its units, the enemy plays like he is a real character. For example: monsters don't sacrifice themselves in order to defeat your party, if a monster is low on health, he will run, even thought it seems obvious to sacrifice this unit to hurt your party. This happens because monsters plays like real living beings, not wanting to die, and not like pieces in a chess board played by one mastermind. This seems like a small feature, but those kind of small things adds to the experience.
Bad things about the game:
1- Low effort by the CPU in arming their human units, both in terms of skills and equipment.
Common characteristics for games nowadays, but impressive for a NES title:
1. Towns and Dungeons have different looks and design;
2. Towns have "numeric NPCs", a high amount of NPCs just to show that people live in those towns, and every one of them can be talked to;
3. Rewarding exploration in the world map, dungeons and even in towns;
4. Very big world map;
5. The presence of the "opening shortcuts" mechanic;
6. Non linear dungeons with very good level design. You don't have and don't need a mini map to know where you are.
Good characteristics of the game:
1. Best "random battle" mechanic;
2. Very balanced level system to where you are in the game right now;
3. Best sidescroller medieval combat to date (making use of a sword and shield), to this day never replicated. If you want to try the best "sword and shield sidescroller gameplay" again, this game is still your only option. I feel like I am being made a hostage by this game. I want to desperately move away from this 1985 game, but this is still the only game in which I can have this combat, no one tries to replicate it in a better and more modern game;
4. Everytime an humanoid enemy appears, the game let's you fight him 1 v 1, balancing its difficulty.
Bad characteristics of the game:
1. Bosses (aside from the final boss);
2. Just one checkpoint for the whole game;
3. The game doesn't teach new players how to approach its deep combat. If it clicks in you, you probably already beat the game by the force of anger. It will be like beating Sekiro without deflecting, because the game never taught you so.
4. Death Mountain is a poor designed map;
5. Thunderbird is a legitimately unfair boss.
1. Towns and Dungeons have different looks and design;
2. Towns have "numeric NPCs", a high amount of NPCs just to show that people live in those towns, and every one of them can be talked to;
3. Rewarding exploration in the world map, dungeons and even in towns;
4. Very big world map;
5. The presence of the "opening shortcuts" mechanic;
6. Non linear dungeons with very good level design. You don't have and don't need a mini map to know where you are.
Good characteristics of the game:
1. Best "random battle" mechanic;
2. Very balanced level system to where you are in the game right now;
3. Best sidescroller medieval combat to date (making use of a sword and shield), to this day never replicated. If you want to try the best "sword and shield sidescroller gameplay" again, this game is still your only option. I feel like I am being made a hostage by this game. I want to desperately move away from this 1985 game, but this is still the only game in which I can have this combat, no one tries to replicate it in a better and more modern game;
4. Everytime an humanoid enemy appears, the game let's you fight him 1 v 1, balancing its difficulty.
Bad characteristics of the game:
1. Bosses (aside from the final boss);
2. Just one checkpoint for the whole game;
3. The game doesn't teach new players how to approach its deep combat. If it clicks in you, you probably already beat the game by the force of anger. It will be like beating Sekiro without deflecting, because the game never taught you so.
4. Death Mountain is a poor designed map;
5. Thunderbird is a legitimately unfair boss.