For a long time, I thought this was the best game in the series because I had grown with it. It was one of the first rpgs I had played that wasn't either mario and luigi or pokemon. It truly blew my mind with its sheer scale and ability to make me relate to the characters just through their mechanics. Somehow, this game also took me the longest to actually finish, and still I have trouble with kefka's tower.
Looking back, there's a lot of things I don't like about the game that I couldn't point out as a kid. While I love all the characters, some of the characters in the back half of part 1 of the game don't get nearly as much characterization and are kind of recruited in with few personal events. Cyan, Sabin, Locke, and Celes are still the most fleshed out and best characters by the end, and they are some of the earliest you meet.

This game truly set strides in allowing the personality and story of a character define their battle mechanics, and I really respect that to this day. But, the problem with the way the combat is in this game is that the skills some of the characters have are crazy strong, and always available. Unlike ff4, characters in ff6 have moves that make both normal attacks and weapons barely required for most of the game (not to mention front rows at all), and the difficulty is generally low as a result. Plus, once magic enters the picture, the need for using weapons lessens even more.

The magic system, kind of a precursor to the materia system and the junction system thematically, fits extremely well for the themes of the game. Using materials acting as symbols or tethers to god-creatures of old to channel and use their power makes a lot of sense and adds weight to the worldbuilding of the conflict being set up. But, it can be really tough figuring out what magicite to give to who and when, if one should go for spell learning or stat growth. And in the end I think spell learning outweighs the stat benefits almost every time.

A big feeling this game gives me now is a kind of general bloat. Unlike ff4 and ff5, equipment and accessories have different pages on the menu entirely, and have different functions. Equipment goes on the full body, covering each part, and accessories usually do lots of different things, like prevent status ailments, or reduce mp costs, but they can also do things like make a person attack 4 times per turn, give weapons instant death properties, which really adds customization, but when you add the magicite system on top of that, you start juggling lots of different systems, not to mention subsystems with some character skills like blitz. It's very easy for me to completely forget who has which spells and a lot of them end up overlapping totally, which starts to lessen the impact of individual members to the team. This game has so many characters too. Probably the biggest roster of any in the series still, to this day. This is the kind of bloat I'm referring to. There's a mechanical and narrative bloat that especially begins to slow down the latter parts of the game.
I'm also not a big fan of the controlling multiple teams thing. When one team dies, it's an instant game over, and switching between them can be a hassle. I do however, think it's a cool as hell idea, and I think in some ways this game manages to be really cinematic in scope, pacing, and structure in ways that the ps1 titles don't manage to reach, simply because of ongoing parallel narratives in both scripting and dungeon design.

I think in the end, parts of this game contradicts itself. A bloat of character choice and customization that isn't done truly right by a lower than average difficulty, characterization through mechanics and combat that gets undermined by the magic system, a lot of characters and a somewhat rushed second half, etc.

I think this game is probably perfect in nearly every other regard though. The music, plot, art design, the big twist that happens, all that stuff is fantastic, and really, really grand. This kind of feels in a way like some of those epic movies of the 30s-50s felt like, in full color and wide visual scope. Probably no other game in the series after this one manages to reach those pure scenario ultra-wide angle style highs. Nor do they need to, though!

I think future games figured out that they needed to give character skills a separate place from the mainstay of battle, which is what 7 chose to do with limit breaks and instead allowed you to build your character in a way that compliments those skills in the way you wanted. In comparison to the later titles, the limit break model and ff6 model both really prioritize performance, by having character mechanics highly motivated by themes and personality, with actual winning/losing battles (fighting to survive) not being as important as learning about these characters and your relationship with them as the player. But, with 6, it's more of a complete hodgepodge of mechanics and systems per character that is kind of just there for you to do whatever with, balance notwithstanding.

In the end, a pure classic game with some unique traits to it. I'll come back to it again as I always do despite everything.

Maybe I'm alone in thinking this but I think this remake would've been better off as a much larger expansion and reimagining of the concepts of the original game.

Panzer Dragoon's greatest strength is that all of it is built around hints and impressions of something larger. Not only the art style, but the stage design, cutscenes, and even the music evoke the imagination into filling out landscapes, ancient cultures, lost species, large battles over swaths of territory, grandiosity of flight, and a legend of some forgotten, unnamed hero.
Each stage made up of mini challenge ideas that represent larger chapters in the scheme of a chase, each musical crescendo and descent an emotional peak for a physical experience beyond self.
The cutscenes as well hint at personal and political relationships between people, factions, and environments and history. Not enough to make any kind of conclusion but it's all made of these light brush strokes of deforming quad-sprite fake polygon meshes and scrolling textures and tells your mind to do all the rendering work.
There's a moment in the game when you blow up the ship of floating white pillars that's been teased in cutscenes only instead of exploding it disintegrates into a flock of pink birds. A gift from the game, I can think about that image for weeks.

The remake adds a lot of small details on models and more set design and I think a pretty cool art style. I think the issue is it doesn't do enough. Since it wasn't just the art style that worked by hinting from the margins, but 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨, I would've liked to see longer or more stages, fleshing out the previous ideas for encounters into longer, more memorable setpieces, more cutscenes that don't necessarily explain the magic away but add more hints at the people, landscapes, factions, and relationships.

Panzer Dragoon is designed to speak volumes in sparseness (even if those volumes are different for every person's imagination), but Saturn sparseness doesn't quite work in a game that already looks like a reimagining, but doesn't play or read like one.

As someone who went through each game on a grand dragon quest adventure and ended up loving each one, this one always ranked lowest for me and I always wondered why since so many love it so much.

I think I've pinpointed it to a few things. I guess it feels really vanilla compared to the other games in the series. It plays like a really well polished adventure-exploration simulator. But it feels less funny than other games, less unique than say 4, less heartwrenching than 5, less expansive than 6 or 2, and less timeless than 1.

For one, I hate that the battles have a terribly low run rate. It gets easier to run in a single battle the more times you attempt but the first attempt almost always fails, so you just get hit a lot. The encounter rate is almost as high as dq2, but that game let you run really easily from many encounters, so it feels really free wheeling. But this game makes encounters kind of a chore a lot of the time, especially if you don't have much choice of strategy in the early game.

The dialogue isn't as charming as 1 or 2, though not terrible. The earth-style world is cool, but not enough to buy me over.

The game is technically non-linear, but not as open as 2 or totally open to nonlinear travel as enemies are stronger in some areas and it's so hard to run, so it's near unsurvivable to encounter a strong foe. It felt more hintbased than 2. Not a bad thing but not as interesting for me.

The choices in this game are more plentiful than previous games but they feel kinda lackluster to me when if I can't fight a boss, I have no choice but to grind. I could swap a party member but that takes grinding too. Compare this to final fantasy 1, which came out a few months earlier, which gave you options of magic shops and builds changing between evasion and armor, even with rigid class choices are the start. Dragon quest 3s class change system allows for a few big choices but not frequent minute choices, and I guess I prefer the latter.

Dq3 is interesting as a declaration of the series for games that would be adventure simulators where adventure and exploration is the message, and the story heightens that, compared to final fantasy where adventure and exploration is a vehicle for a separate message, and the adventure aspects are tailored to heighten that message. The exploration is more linear in ff, where unlike dq3, the different paths available lead to the same destinations along a linear plotline. The two games build a divergence in the history of grand storytelling and narrative structure in games.