*mogs your favorite overhyped SNES jrpg*
 Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
 Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
*mogs your favorite overhyped SNES jrpg*
*mogs your favorite overhyped SNES jrpg*
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
It could have been longer and had more content but it was good, sure. Very well paced for its time and better than games made decades after.
It's ok
The rotating 5th character shit is annoying and it doesn't have a good open world act.
Cope
It's a great game, one of the best jrpgs of the 16 bits generation although I don't have a clear favorite.
Nah.
Super mario rpg is better
Not even close.
Console warring is pathetic, but using Phantasy Star for console warringsing must be the lowest low.
>hey we only have ONE RPG versus the 100 the other console has!!
>but it's the bestest one I swear!!!
>You're so totally mogged I can smell your tears!!
>>hey we only have ONE RPG versus the 100 the other console has!!
>>but it's the bestest one I swear!!!
>>You're so totally mogged I can smell your tears!!
that's how N64 gays have acted for decades
Not a single N64 fan claims the system has the best RPG (good is not the same as best)
>hey we only have ONE RPG
Stopped reading right there.
%3D%3D
Addams Family, the greatest RPG on Megadrive
The original Phantasy Star had a Genesis port? Is it much different?
No, it's just a straight port that runs on Megadrive and Japanese only. The PS2 remake of Phantasy Star 1 is pretty good but not the second one because of the added AIDS attack charging system.
Save for Phantasy Star, Shining Force, Shadowrunner and Pirates! Gold barely anyone cares about any RPG on that list.
Looking at the action ones, games like Soleil, Beyond Oasis or Wonderboy are great.
I don't know how many people care about them, it doesn't prove anything about the games being good or bad.
Fans of a certain company only value popularity and confuse it for quality
The Lunar games are quite good as well.
>console warring is pathetic
>proceeds to type up console warring slander about the mega drive
The anon you're responding too is a tendie and he uses always the same "console warring" shtick in every thread that isn't super positive of Nintendo, but you'll never see him in anti-Sony/Sega/PC threads.
Loved this game but I do think Chrono Trigger is better.
>mogs
Why has /vr/ and Ganker too boot had an influx of these underage redditors these past few weeks?
Did some homosexual ass youtuber mention Ganker or these boards? I know these mindless insects that speak like that don't think independently so it must have come from somewhere.
>Ganker popularizes word/meme
>Gankerers start acting like redditors invented it
The only boards that speak like that are reddit infested boards like Ganker.
Not only that but the sentence structure is a premade stock one, the asterisk actions, the buzzwords, the contrarianism is clearly that of a fricking Gankeredditor.
You can spot a redditor/social media loving gay by how they speak, how much they love to use preamade phrases, buzzwords popular on social media, how much they mention and love e-celebs, how often they reblog headlines and social media posts, basically anything and everything outside of Ganker.
You must be fun at parties
(I'm using another overused phrase because I know it will make you mad)
>asterisk actions
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Asterisk&diff=prev&oldid=30941314 (2005)
Eh....
"Mogs" comes from incel forums, not Ganker or reddit.
It's from cringe pickup artists originally, from the term "amog" "alpha male of group."
I assume it’s because Ganker has become unusable
Phantasy Star II is better THOUGH.
The presentation of Phantasy Star IV is far beyond that of the second game in the series.
>muh graphics
They mattered a lot more back then, especially in a genre like RPGs.
Video games are a visual medium, if you're looking at something for 30 hours it helps if it doesn't look like dogshit.
Sorry but it's just as overrated as any other SNES RPG. Everything about PS2 was dumbed down, and the plot starts great but stops trying after certain events. Still it's good as an entry level game, it's very accessible because of his dumbed down it is
It was my fave out of the PhantStar OG Genesis games. Great soundtrack as well. I take PStarIV over Chrono Trigger or Earthbound any day
>I take PStarIV over Chrono Trigger or Earthbound any day
My condolences.
Hey I'm playing it now and I don't quite get it. Everyone has like 2 sets of spells and they're all really strong? Am I missing something? It's like every spells just kills everything.
You're not missing anything. This game just sucks, and I don't understand how anyone is rating it highly - it's straight up average game, 5/10 RPG for the time. Forget SNES RPGs. Even good NES RPGs mog it - like Metal Max. PSIV is a very easy game, with little variety. Economy plain sucks in the game, you automatically own best gear without trying to grind, so there's no choices of what to pick like in Dragon Quest f.e.. Most of the combat is too easy, requiring no thought; and it's not like there's many spells or something to make it even fun to watch/interact with. Dungeon layouts are atrociously lazy - nothing interesting to look at, nor are they challenging to explore - it's just corridors, no challenging puzzles, no traps that require you to engage and memorize stuff. You can blindlessly run around and you'll complete them, as there's like 3 branching paths with quick dead ends, there's no traps that send you to another level or anything, to make you make you turn on your brain - if it doesn't require to take the game serious in any capacity. Layouts that were made in 5-10mins sometimes it seems (minus 1 or 2 late-game areas). So what is it about the game? I guess aesthetics? Because otherwise, in no area does this game shine. It's your plain average RPG. Go play Shining Force II instead.
>nor are they challenging to explore - it's just corridors
That's the industry stndard, isn't it? Do you like PSII dungeons?
>You're not missing anything. This game just sucks, and I don't understand how anyone is rating it highly - it's straight up average game, 5/10 RPG for the time
You are an actual moron and probably shouldn't speak on the time period since you blatantly ignored many of the things that made PS4 great for the time. Is it easy? Yes, every RPG of that era is easy and can be destroyed without engaging in random encounters other than shitty grindfests like Dragon Quest(a game which you just blew). Does it mostly have hallways and chests? Yes, just like every single fricking RPG of that era. Literally every single complaint you listed here is emblematic of all RPGs of that era and the "exceptions" you listed aren't actually exceptions or are just shitty in different ways.
What PS4 DID innovate(in a sense of series as well as individual game, since PS4 was a lot of people's first PS game) that you seem oblivious to is that it was one of the very first game to innovate custom cutscenes complete with anime panels, prioritizing free flowing fast paced gameplay that had quick but satisfying animations and graphics, had text style combat windows that actually displayed your characters attacking and being attacked by enemies, and included customized macro "auto battle" commands that you could set. So it was as good as any other RPG in the sense of difficulty/dungeons/whatever but it had a very fast, satisfying pace and excellent storytelling and graphics for the time; something which usually mattered more to people playing RPGs.
Forgot to add: it's one of the first RPGs to ever fully implement "quests" in the form of jobs from the Hunter association.
>What PS4 DID innovate(in a sense of series as well as individual game, since PS4 was a lot of people's first PS game) that you seem oblivious to is that it was one of the very first game to innovate custom cutscenes complete with anime panels, prioritizing free flowing fast paced gameplay that had quick but satisfying animations and graphics, had text style combat windows that actually displayed your characters attacking and being attacked by enemies,
bro Lunar is right the frick there and it came out a year prior in both Japan and the US, and even it wasn't the first
That sounds pretty cool, actually, I might try it.
You're the moron here, and obviously YOU don't know jack about the period.
>Yes, every RPG of that era is easy and can be destroyed without engaging in random encounters other than shitty grindfests.
Missed the point of my argument. Which was "Combat is too easy, requiring no thought" - thought is the part. When you have a great RPG, the combat is discerning weaknesses and strengths of the enemies, and taking them out in particular orders, calculating each hit potential damage as every move counts greatly, knowing when to use certain spells depending on RNG outcomes, etc., etc. - this is lacking in PSIV, as it is a braindead game. Compare it with FF1 for NES that came out years prior, and you had to THINK in that game, when combating, but not in shit-games like PSIV where you mostly mash A. So no, it's not about grinding.
>Does it mostly have hallways and chests? Yes, just like every single fricking RPG of that era.
No it fricking doesn't. Take aforementioned Metal Max for example. Dungeons there are designed where parts of them you explore with a vehicle, and parts on foot - which introduces a whole different element to open up parts of the dungeon to let your vehicle in, you can discover cars or various upgrades and weapons, as well as chest boxes, wherein in PSIV chests are riddled with unneeded items as the game is easy as it is. Many RPGs of the time had various traps and puzzles in their dungeons. You needed to push blocks or use bombs to blow up parts that lead you to extra goodies. Or shit like demon gathering, fusing and other stuff of that nature in games like Shin Megami Tensei.
>When you have a great RPG, the combat is discerning weaknesses and strengths of the enemies, and taking them out in particular orders, calculating each hit potential damage as every move counts greatly, knowing when to use certain spells depending on RNG outcomes, etc., etc. - this is lacking in PSIV, as it is a braindead game. Compare it with FF1 for NES
FF1 didn't require thinking and I never once exploited elemental weaknesses in it and I didn't need to. You know what the optimal strategy is in FF1? Spam AoE attacks in random encounters when you want to actually gain experience. When in a dungeon, run from everything unless you can't. Monotonously buying 99 potions one at a time since the game won't allow you to buy in multiples. The only thing barring you from this is just how fricking boring it is to play like this. So would you rather play a game where you don't have challenging random encounters but the gameplay is fast and has regular story progression or one where the optimal strategy is to spend 15 minutes maxing out potions every time you come back from a dungeon and running from every random encounter until you hit a boss? Because that is FF1.
And then when you hit an actual boss, you cast Fast on your fighter and smack it a few times and win. You WOULD cast Temper as well, but that spell doesn't even work in the game. Half the spells don't work or do the opposite of what they're supposed to. But what a superior game it is where half the spells do literally nothing.
The truth is almost all retro RPGs are broken or easy from a gameplay perspective outside of the truly hardcore shit like Wizardry. Even the "hard" ones like FF1. The SNES and Genesis era of RPGs prioritized graphics, music, and storytelling over gameplay and it's obvious. The problem here is you're trying to make excuses for every other RPG of the period gameplay wise while ignoring their flaws but then saying PS4 is uniquely bad, which it isn't.
>The problem here is you're trying to make excuses for every other RPG of the period gameplay wise while ignoring their flaws but then saying PS4 is uniquely bad, which it isn't.
No, I in fact, I dislike more RPGs of the period than PSIV, and for this reason I told you. There are RPGs where mashing A (for attack, attack, attack) will get you killed, unless you power-level your party, and then there are those that don't - like PSIV. And I simply dislike such brain dead games. You talk about optimal strategies in FF1, which can find in guides, and that's all well and good - I never argued that many RPGs can't be exploited - they can; so it's up to you if you want to min-max everything - I personally never play in that manner. But fact of the matter still stands, that in FF1 or FF3 you need to think, while in games like Shining in the Darkness or PSIV, the combat 90+% of the time is you mashing A being bored. Lastly, you can dissolution yourself with all the things that PSIV "innovated" and not look at the real picture, it's up to you - but the reality is that that game didn't innovate a single thing I can think of, and I played many games from that period, many that weren't even realized outside Japan, years ago, and I remember comparing all these games from back then. And PSIV to me was a vast disappointment, and didn't live up to the hype.
released* outside Japan
>Many RPGs of the time had various traps and puzzles in their dungeons. You needed to push blocks or use bombs to blow up parts that lead you to extra goodies.
Except they really didn't. The "puzzles" you're talking about usually amounted to hitting two switches or something really simple. A game like Lufia 2 which actually had significant puzzle solving in it didn't come out until 1995. PS4 came out in 1993. Most any RPG you can name within a year of it didn't have significantly complicated dungeons and almost all just had the formula of Hallway: chest or dead end. The only variation to this is maybe damage tiles or a pitfall, which for some reason you are puffing up as genius level dungeon design that makes SO much of a difference. Like those two things are present in FF4 but I wouldn't argue the dungeons in FF4 are really superior to PS4. They play out basically the same and the only change winds up being you have to cast float on your party from the menu on every floor, wasting your time.
Again, the issue here is you're uniquely blaming PS4 as having these faults when these things were absolutely standard for the time and present in almost every RPG. Are you really going to argue that PS4 suddenly had good dungeons if it just had pitfalls and damage tiles? I just don't think that shit even matters or hits my radar in whether an RPG is good or not.
You simply ignore what I say. The dungeon layouts are bad in PSIV. And no, the puzzles were a thing in quite a number of games, and I never said they were some "genius level design" - but they are vastly superior than not having any variety and few minute dungeons with three branching paths and empty rooms. Going into a DQ2 dungeon from 1988, is much more fun than PSIV - in DQ2 dungeon you can go into some cave, step on a tile that drops you into a dangerous underground, where you need to find your way back, going through poison waters, and then you need to memorize which tile dropped if you leave the dungeon and such - and this is just one single element that adds surprise, adds a nervous element which is exciting (will I be able to get out?), especially for the time, and it adds a factor where your memory needs to get involved. Just the layout themselves add way more interest for a player, if he needs to actively pay attention and retain in his memory where he took turns to get out of them when in danger.
And I wasn't critiquing dungeons because they're "hallways and chests" per se, anyways - but the layouts of the dungeon and lack of variety in PSIV, anyways; thinks that make you consider things on use your brain actively. Dungeons in PSIV are shit, not challenging, basic in design, with minimal branches or depth (and before you go and say that "mazes suck" - I'm not talking about dungeons that are mazes, but something more than what a 7 year old could navigate while eating cereal and not paying attention, as that is the case with most of the game until near the end) - if a dungeon you loop in 1-5min, when it's for people with 70iq because otherwise you're going to get bored as it requires no thought, no real exploration or sense of danger, where in a pinch you might need to stay on your A-game to get out of the dungeon by taking the correct paths back.
>included customized macro "auto battle" commands that you could set
Was in SMT that came out before. You played very little RPGs at the time, and you yourself understand jack about what it innovated. Nor do you get basic design of an RPG if you muddle everything down to "well every game is around the same". As for "excellent storytelling" - don't make me laugh. You might want to get the basics down first in a game, like script. Earthbound blows PSIV out of the water, because in Earthbound every npc has witty dialogue and the descriptions are well written and fun to read. PSIV meantime reads like it was written by a programmer who read 3 trashy sci-fi manga.
>Dungeons in PSIV are shit, not challenging, basic in design, with minimal branches or depth (and before you go and say that "mazes suck" - I'm not talking about dungeons that are mazes, but something more than what a 7 year old could navigate while eating cereal and not paying attention, as that is the case with most of the game until near the end) - if a dungeon you loop in 1-5min, when it's for people with 70iq because otherwise you're going to get bored as it requires no thought, no real exploration or sense of danger, where in a pinch you might need to stay on your A-game to get out of the dungeon by taking the correct paths back.
I want you to read back this paragraph and pretend you're talking to a 6-14 year old kid and understand just how ridiculous you sound. Because that is the primary audience for this RPG at its release. It's not intended for raging nearly 40 year old autists that demand complicated dungeon design. It was intended for hobbyist children who played video games on the weekend in the early 90's.
These developers learned from the shitty NES days that kids didn't enjoy not being able to complete games and having all of these super hard unbeatable games with complex long dungeon maze designs and no directions of previous releases. That's why SNES and Genesis RPGs are easy by comparison. They were meant to be beatable by casual children. The problem is you're critiquing it incredibly harshly as an adult in 2024 and simultaneously holding it to ridiculous standards, making unfair comparisons to other RPGs of the era, and placing an importance on gameplay balance in an genre that doesn't really focus on that.
The importance in the design of the game was the storytelling, presentation, and flow. Things which PS4 does amazingly. The gameplay may not be challenging for an adult in 2024, but it was challenging for children in the 90's.
Can all you do is talk in hyperbole of the highest order? What are you talking about? You are absurd, and also you are so ironic. Here's a guy who speaks how PSIV is landmark game, with plenty of innovation - and yet can't give a single solid argument for that. Yet says I sound ridiculous for saying other RPGs did more things than PSIV, and thus I found PSIV to be average, while finding other RPGs to be above average and great.
>It's not intended for raging nearly 40 year old autists that demand complicated dungeon design.
Where did I stated that in RPGs you need to be 40 year old math genius to navigate dungeons? How is a person this butthurt over me stating that I find PSIV average, and giving reasons. I stand with my reasons, exactly as I say, I guarantee that a 7 year old, while eating while playing and not thoroughly paying attention, can navigate PSIV dungeon with ease - as it has bad, overly simplistic design - in fact you need to multitask as otherwise you'll likely get bored - that's how braindead it is. You jump from this to - "he asks games for 40 year olds". What a total moron you are. Have shame, and take out PSIV wiener out of your mouth.
>Was in SMT that came out before.
First of all, that was never released in the US in that era, so this is a moot and fricking stupid point. We're US consumers. Bringing up Japanese exclusive releases is just stupid. Second, you're wrong anyways. Re-read what I wrote. Phantasy Star as a series had macros before SMT. They didn't debut with PS4, PS4 was merely the first exposure that many people had to it. Visibility of these innovations matters, and PS4 was one of the first on top of doing so many other things well.
> Earthbound blows PSIV out of the water, because in Earthbound every NPC has witty dialogue and the descriptions are well written and fun to read.
Earhbound came out very late in the SNES's lifespan you fricking moron. The PS1 came to North America 3 months after its release. I'd also argue that Earthbound has a weaker primary plot than PS4 does, but considering your hateboner for PS4, I doubt you'd admit that anyways. But sure, it has quirkier and funner NPCs. 95% of RPGs did not.
Your arguments here are just shit. All of them boil down to you making reference to one specific thing some specific game might have done better than PS4, pretending the entire genre of RPGs also had that level of quality or standards, and that PS4 uniquely did not have it. I feel like I'm talking to an actual idiot that couldn't be impartial if he tried. You're just going to keep making this style of argument and I'm not really interested in engaging with it and repeating myself over and over since you keep going back to the same arguments.
> We're US consumers. Bringing up Japanese exclusive releases is just stupid.
No it isn't. As those Japanese only games inspired other games - which had translations and released outside of Japan. Bringing up innovation, and then cherry picking it by excluding some, is dumb.
>Earhbound came out very late in the SNES's lifespan
Earthbound came out 8 months after PSIV, and likely was in development while PSIV wasn't even released. But here you'll say how japanese release dates don't matter, when both games are japanese. Dumb frick. And if you going to argue released dates, PSIV in US came out in Feb of '95, while Earthbound released few months after in June - so from "US consumer perspective" PSIV would be dated as shit. And the only reason it wasn't per se, is because gamers at the time had very little exposure to JRPGs, unlike japanese - so likely PSIV was one of their first and left an amazing impression. Likely thats why you suck off PSIV like that.
>Earthbound has a weaker primary plot than PS4 does
No, it certainly doesn't. Earthbound is far ahead of PSIV in terms of plot. But you really just picked a bad target. What I'll say though, is PSIV plot while not great, was rather a norm for the time - if you wanted good plot you likely turned to tactics games like Fire Emblem on NES or SNES to get engaging warfare dramas with big casts, and big twists and turns (for the time).
>Your arguments here are just shit. All of them boil down to you making reference to one specific thing some specific game might have done better than PS4, pretending the entire genre of RPGs also had that level of quality or standards
No, I never stated any of these things. There are many RPGs that were bellow average, average or above average. You just choose to interpret my critique on PSIV as if PSIV is the worst in my eyes, or that there were dozens and dozens of games that were far ahead of average. Here's some news to you - average means average, you moron.
> Re-read what I wrote. Phantasy Star as a series had macros before SMT.
You wrote: >What PS4 DID innovate(in a sense of series as well as individual game, since PS4 was a lot of people's first PS game) that you seem oblivious to is that it was one of the very first game to innovate custom cutscenes complete with anime panels, prioritizing free flowing fast paced gameplay that had quick but satisfying animations and graphics, had text style combat windows that actually displayed your characters attacking and being attacked by enemies, and included customized macro "auto battle" commands that you could set.
>PS4 DID innovate
>included customized macro "auto battle" commands that you could set.
So I responded to this. Idiot.
> innovate custom cutscenes complete with anime panels, prioritizing free flowing fast paced gameplay that had quick but satisfying animations and graphics
No it didn't. As this guy mentioned. In fact, it was done years prior in games other than RPG. What's more, your so called innovation is actually exact opposite - it's a downgrade. How are some manga comic panels better than a cutscene, that been in RPGs since long ago. Like YS games on Turbografx? This post is a total joke.
>one of the first
>hey, I know, I'll cut out half the sentence and pretend I'm right
Dumb homosexual.
You didn't even address the point. How are you in the right? Manga cutscenes weren't anything innovative. They were a downgrade from regular, and even cinematic anime cutscenes that were a thing before PSIV. As for you flaunted battle animations. Fire Emblem and Shining Force also had animations. Even other RPGs like Dragon Quest 5 had spell animations - monsters would do little dances and poses. It wasn't no innovation, that just wasn't too common - that's the difference. So you're wrong. Don't flaunt words like "innovation".
You're arguing like a dipshit. When discussing innovation for a market, their level of exposure to it matters. Most people will credit The Matrix for innovating Bullet Time. Are they wrong because technically some random no name homosexual movie did it a year before then and a whole 20 people saw it? PS4 was way bigger than anything named in this thread as an earlier example. I also specifically said comic style anime cutscenes, not anime cutscenes or FMVs period. And I even put in the qualifier "one of the" since I knew it wasn't literally the first one to do it.
Was PS4 literally the first to ever implement or invent these things? No. Was it the first game where the US market was exposed to these innovations? Largely yes. Did it tie them all together in a great package? Yes.
The only embarrassing, seething dipshit here is you.
>Was it the first game where the US market was exposed to these innovations?
>L-l--l-largely y--y-yes.
Kek. How is it not embarrassing to goal post shift. No, again, PSIV didn't innovate shit, even in US market. You confuse "innovation" with "being new to certain american kids" - like now we have to be impressed by this. LMAO.
>The only embarrassing, seething dipshit here is you.
Says the guy spamming kek and LMAO and even doing stutter posting and insecurely declaring himself the winner of an internet argument.
>You confuse "innovation" with "being new to certain american kids"
That's what innovation largely is. A market's first exposure to a phenomena. The original actual creators of something new are rarely credited anyways. Half the people that you think invented shit were just stolen and popularized by someone else. Hell, most Japanese composers considered "legends" today quite literally just stole music from Americans and Europeans and repackaged it in their games.
You're honestly just splitting hairs here and making shitty bad arguments about how since either games released only in Japan did it or games that barely anybody in the US played should for some reason matter to the US market. I am a US consumer. Most people posting on this board are. How well these releases sold here does matter to the zeitgeist of how they're remembered.
Can you make a single valid point in your whole response?
>That's what innovation largely is.
No, you literally in your first post, said that PSIV was the first to do these things. Then goal post shifted. And now made up your own definitions to justify your own shitty points. That's not what innovation is.
>You're honestly just splitting hairs here and making shitty bad arguments about how since either games released only in Japan did it or games that barely anybody in the US played should for some reason matter to the US market.
No. I responded to all your points by easily debunking them - like, Earthbound and PSIV being close in release. While you spoke mistakenly like it was released in '93. Or talking about impressive sales - while many other RPGs had better sales. What's happening here is you not addressing all my points above. By not addressing them, and saying "I'm splitting hairs" is you giving up, as you don't have a point, and can only shift the argument.
While you spoke mistakenly like it was released in '93 (*in US)
>No, you literally in your first post, said that PSIV was the first to do these things.
I objectively did not. Re-read it again.
>What PS4 DID innovate is that it was one of the very first games to innovate custom cutscenes complete with anime panels, prioritizing free flowing fast paced gameplay that had quick but satisfying animations and graphics, had text style combat windows that actually displayed your characters attacking and being attacked by enemies, and included customized macro "auto battle" commands that you could set.
That was a list of things all included in one as a package in PS4. Meaning it brought together all of those aspects to create a singular unique and fun gaming experience that most people had never been exposed to. I wasn't arguing that those things had literally never been done before individually. How can I even argue that it was the first to prioritize fast combat? That makes no sense. The point was that it brought all of these things together under one game. That was the innovation.
I admit, I must've misread your OG post, because the word you had to use then would be "reiteration", as it makes no sense to use word "innovation" otherwise. And as for everything else I pointed out - you ignored all my arguments. Like you still have not addressed any of it, or for some that you "did", you goal shifted. So address all that stuff. You are yet to point to mechanics or features that were first introduced there, aka, innovations. If a game consists of nothing but reiterations of previous existing elements, when it is not innovating anything, it just creates a mash of existing features that are particular to PSIV
> The point was that it brought all of these things together under one game. That was the innovation.
By this logic most games are innovative. Taking A from this game, B from that and calling it innovation isn't innovation, when other games genuinely DO DO something first time. Innovation is something like a mechanic to recruit monsters to join your party, when that wasn't been done before.
>How can I even argue that it was the first to prioritize fast combat? That makes no sense.
Yes it makes no sense. Everything you type makes no sense, as you use incorrect definitions for things. You can't argue this, exactly, so why are you bringing that in to begin with?
>I admit, I must've misread your OG post
I'm aware.
>you ignored all my arguments.
I've only ignored things where you're trying to shove words in my mouth or you're essentially having an autistic meltdown. I've focused on clarifying what I'm saying since you've gone off on tangents completely irrelevant to what I've actually been arguing.
>If a game consists of nothing but reiterations of previous existing elements, when it is not innovating anything, it just creates a mash of existing features that are particular to PSIV
This is a moot point and you're trying to overextend my argument to be something it isn't so that you can pretend you refuted it. I don't claim to know the exact originator of any given idea because most creation is just people borrowing and building upon ideas from others. Even people we see as true creators of things are generally building on principles established by others. I don't care to determine or argue about the first instances of these mechanics as it doesn't matter to the point I was making about PS4. Which is that for the majority of the US market, it innovated the things I previously mentioned while not necessarily being the originator of those mechanics.
>By this logic most games are innovative.
Not really. PS4 made many design decisions were the result of mushing together the best of many existing ideas both within its own series and elsewhere. It stands out as innovative to people of the time period, because while it may not been the absolute first originator of many of these ideas, it was their first exposure to many of these good ideas under one umbrella.
>moot point
It's not a moot point. You can't make definitions to words that suit you.
>shove words in my mouth
I addressed the points that you made, while you ignored them, because you got beat. Classic statements of insane hyperbole and exaggeration, to blatant falsehoods, to pure nonsense. You didn't defend PSIV dungeon design in any capacity, just boiled everything into "every game from that is the same amount of complexity", brought up US market sales data, by cherry picking opponents to it (like YS). Disregarded, without countering, examples how in other RPGs battles are more intricate, dungeons are more complex and them having variety. Mistook dates of when games were released, creating the image that certain games were at the consoles life spans end, while PSIV was not. Goalshifted and mistook that macros were a thing prior to PSIV in Phantasy Star series. Defined false definitions to innovation to suit your purposes. Ignored games mentioned having those innovations as not important, and pretended like that's splitting hairs. Among other things. Your whole chain of responses is a joke.
>You didn't defend PSIV dungeon design in any capacity
I didn't need to. You blatantly misrepresented it in relation to other RPG design of the era and I never argued it was a strong suit of it anyways. You're the one that insisted on its importance while I merely acknowledged it isn't very good while also clarifying that most RPGs of the era have similarly yawnworthy dungeon designs. I classify most of them under forgettable while these minor additions, like damage tiles or floor falling traps, appear to mean a great deal to you.
>brought up US market sales data, by cherry picking opponents to it (like YS)
I brought those things up specifically to illustrate that nobody played them and thus a very tiny minority of people would have ever been exposed to those mechanics, which is completely relevant to what we were discussing.
>Disregarded, without countering, examples how in other RPGs battles are more intricate, dungeons are more complex and them having variety.
I ignored you cherrypicking individual examples from specific games and then acting like those were industry standards, yes. If we do that with any game, we can make it look inferior unless it is the absolute pinnacle of its genre in all regards, which no game is. I am operating under comparing PS4 to its competitors as an overall product. You are comparing individual aspects of it to paint a misleading picture.
Besides, you've been pretty openly biased from the get go. Arguing that FF1 somehow required strategy(it doesn't) or that Dragon Quest was superior just because you have to trudge through it and grind as an example of "having to think".
>Goalshifted and mistook that macros were a thing prior to PSIV in Phantasy Star series.
This is false. I acknowledged this from my very first post in this thread. Before you even replied to me.
>I didn't need to. You blatantly misrepresented it in relation to other RPG design of the era and I never argued it was a strong suit of it anyways.
No, you did argue by pretending that PSIV is not lacking in that area. The whole argument began with my opinion that PSIV was an avarage RPG for the time - and that means that yes, other avarage RPGs had similair amount of complextion or the lack there of, which I'm not a fan of, thus I have games that I prefer and deem above avarage.
>appear to mean a great deal to you.
?? No shit, as it's my opinion, and why I called the game avarage. And you couldn't counter any examples of the games I mentioned or sway my opinion by mentioning "it's all the same, really, who cares". And don't pretend like tiles or switches are everything because I listed few short examples. Other RPGs had optional mini bosses, monster recruiting (like DQ5 or SMT), where then each dungeon has unique value if you want something. Or dungeons have not only items but mounts that you can drive like in Metal Max. As well as just focusing on one point like "dungeon complexity" while disregarding many more things I can mention. DQ games have casinos, monster battle colosseums, you can go exploring finding hidden items you can dig out - so many things.
>Arguing that FF1 somehow required strategy(it doesn't) or that Dragon Quest was superior just because you have to trudge through it and grind as an example of "having to think".
Yes mashing A for most of the game is inferior to having to think. And FF1 did require much more strategy than PSIV
>No, you did argue by pretending that PSIV is not lacking in that area.
No, I didn't. Feel free to quote where I said Phantasy Star 4 had good dungeons, because I didn't. My argument has been since the start that most all RPGs in that era have lackluster, forgettable dungeons and that PS4 isn't particularly unique in that regard. It's why I don't care much about them in rating how good a retro RPG is.
>The whole argument began with my opinion that PSIV was an avarage RPG for the time
That's not really what you argued. That's disingenuous. You did use the word average, but you also said:
>You're not missing anything.
>This game just sucks
>5/10 RPG for the time
>even good NES RPGs mog it
>Because otherwise, in no area does this game shine.
Which gives a very different impression to your opinion.
>?? No shit, as it's my opinion, and why I called the game avarage
No shit. I'm just saying your nitpicks don't matter to most people so your reasoning for hating PS4 just comes off as petty autism. Also, I'm genuinely not intending to be a dick here, but it's "average" and you misspelled it 4 times in your post, which is weird because you spelled it correctly earlier in this thread.
>Other RPGs had optional mini bosses, monster recruiting (like DQ5 or SMT), where then each dungeon has unique value if you want something.
That's nice and all but those RPGs suck gigantic fricking dick in other ways. You appear to be someone that likes slow, plodding, clunky gameplay and intricate maze dungeon design so no wonder you hate PS4. For other people, story and presentation matter a lot more, and PS4 absolutely destroys those games in that category.
>Yes mashing A for most of the game is inferior to having to think.
You don't have to think in FF1 or Dragon Quest. You're still mashing A. It's just taking longer to do it.
>No, I didn't. Feel free to quote where I said Phantasy Star 4 had good dungeons, because I didn't.
Read the chain of messages, you perfectly know that I argued that there were many RPGs with more complexity in that area, while you said that that PSIV is very similar of not the same, and thus I say now "not lacking in that area", so I didn't say you said it was amazing and above others - you just downplayed all others.
>That's not really what you argued. That's disingenuous. You did use the word average
The thread says how this game "mogs every SNES JRPG", I ironically reused the word "mog" in response to that directly, while not even saying complete 180 of "Every SNES RPG mogs PSIV" - I said it was a 5/10, average. My lack of arguing which games are worse than PSIV doesn't mean that PSIV is worse and thus "disingenuous". For example, I think Breath of Fire sucks, and I would rate that game 3/10, and it's bellow PSIV.
>even good NES RPGs mog it
Yes, I enjoy FF1, FF3, Metal Max, DQ3 more than PSIV - but not bad NES RPGs like magic of scheherazade or dq1 or ff2 or ghost lion, etc. What's wrong with that statement at all?
>Also, I'm genuinely not intending to be a dick here, but it's "average"
Yeah, I sometimes misspell this word. English isn't my first language. Essentially it's muscle memory typing I sometimes forget to correct, or notice. But anyways, I made many spelling mistakes in all posts, so why do you care to point something so random now? Anyways
>You don't have to think in FF1 or Dragon Quest. You're still mashing A. It's just taking longer to do it.
Targeting specific monsters all the way through the game (they're greatly balanced in that regard as there's always particularly more dangerous targets depending on your party all the way through, with maybe FF1 becoming a bit easier at the later half). And no, you do have to think, and use spells or techniques all the time, essentially it requires to play more optimally than PSIV
>You appear to be someone that likes slow, plodding, clunky gameplay and intricate maze dungeon design so no wonder you hate PS4. For other people, story and presentation matter a lot more, and PS4 absolutely destroys those games in that category.
I value stories and presentation too. In fact a lot. But that doesn't mean I'll suffer being bored through most of the game. It's just that simple. The games I mentioned, to me, are not really clunky or slow. As I said, getting stuck in some FF3 dungeon, running out of items, and having to deal with the pressure to get out of there is very exciting, and thus fun. As for stories. I personally didn't care for PSIV story - it was average fair for me; the only advantages it has is aesthetics - it looks unique. The story, script - is basic for the time. Earthbound or Chrono Trigger to me is more impressive, especially Earthbound, by a mile - I think that game is far ahead of everything else at the time (CT mostly because of the design). If I wanted good stories for those consoles, I usually would go for something like Fire Emblem, as Tactics games are modelled after warfare dramas which are way more complex narratives than a simple JRPG heroes journey, unless it's Earthbound, etc.. But ultimately, I don't think PSIV shine much in presentation, either. Yes the manga panels are pretty cool - character art can be cool. Monster design I don't like personally. But just look at overworld, at dungeons - it's ugly. Many SNES RPGs are way better looking. Or Shining Force I and II - they push Genesis far more, presentation wise. I think PSIV is close to average looking Genesis games - like a 6/10 or 7/10, but it's no Shining Force II.
>Like YS games on Turbografx?
Ah yes, all the 100 people who played those games at release in North America. Truly, this was the US market's first major exposure to the phenomena.
The Turbografx sold like 500k total units in the US in its entire lifetime. The Genesis sold 40 million. Is this even a real argument?
Massive hyperbolic statements, goal post shifting. Trying to pretend like you won an argument by talking about sales, as if now that's all that matters. Embarrassing. If you want to speak about US impact, then no PSIV only impacted Sega Genesis kids. Chrono Trigger was way more impressive , and it showed up in US half a year later. And you can even name all the developers that talk about CT as one of their inspirations, or one of their favorite games, as well ass see CT showing up in all these lists together with other great RPGs - but you rarely see PSIV - because it was irrelevant in terms of such a wide scale. You have no argument, in either case, and at this point I'm even arguing this goal-post shifted point, for the shits and giggles - and you can't even win this one.
Yes, sales matter when discussing a market's exposure to innovation. Nobody owned a turbografx 16 in the US. Pretending like most kids would have any clue what the frick a turbografx 16 even was in the 90's is just silly.
Then you strawmanned and argued against something I never even said(because I'm pretty sure you have me confused with OP and you're, for some reason, holding me accountable for his statements simply because I defended PS4 against your raging moronic hateboner for it). Yes, CT was more innovative and impactful than PS4. I never argued otherwise.
You utter moron. Talks about a strawman, while first initiating a strawman against me in the first place - like the utter moronation here on display is next level. When why are you responding to my point about innovation, when you're not arguing about innovation, and instead arguing for "exposure to certain kids, that played limited scope of games" by pretending like that was the base argument I disagreed or made points against? Where do you see me arguing that "no people could have possible played PSIV before all the other X, Y, Z games - and thus been exposed to whatever mechanics or clichés, or features first through PSIV?" - that's basic logic, you moron. I wasn't argue this, moron. By that logic no argument can be made against any game, as any game can be one's first.
Jesus 90% of this post is just you seething like a moron and losing your mind. I said PS4 was one of the first to innovate many things with the obvious implication that I was discussing the US consumer base. You, and a few other morons, felt the need to point out that either some Japanese exclusive releases or some super niche earlier titles on the turbografx 16 did these things as if they were relevant when they're not. This is a US website for US consumers. PS4 was a major RPG title and for the majority of gamers for the period, their first exposure to those mechanics or things I listed. We're discussing older RPGs of that era are remembered fondly, and I was arguing reasons why consumers in the US remember PS4 more fondly compared to other games of the era.
If you want to argue semantics about the literal first appearance or inventors of these ideas, go for it. I don't care and it has nothing to do with my point, which should have been obvious but I guess I have to spell these things out explicitly for the extremely moronic OCD autists on this website.
You dumbass. How do people don't get the basics of arguing? You made a strawman, there first, and accused me of such. I disagree about innovations made in PSIV - by pointing to SMT (as Macros in Phantasy Star were introduced with IV, as far as I'm aware - I haven't played III, played little of II, so correct me if I'm wrong). And about manga panels being innovative - then others games had that; and more. You, interject, and pretend like NOW, we are arguing about relevance and sales, and US market - when that wasn't the case by my post above you responded to. You can't turn my point into whatever you choose, and then pretend like you didn't. I wasn't arguing exposure in the first place; only after you brought it up.
I have to bring up the US market because you're making arguments about Japanese exclusive games as innovators or games that basically saw an extremely limited US release as examples of games that "innovated" before PS4.
PS4 WAS the US markets first exposure to these innovations, regardless of where they might have been introduced in Japan or on niche systems like the turbografx. That's the entire thing. The entire point of my original post was arguing which aspects were new and innovative to the American public - not about which literal who Japanese company did it first.
PS4 was a major title and the things I listed are the things people remember it innovating for them: anime cutscenes, fast paced combat, flashy high end graphics, and macros. It is very unlikely that any US consumer playing PS4 encountered those things in other games before PS4 in the same way, and the fact that they all appeared in one game is why people see it as groundbreaking and memorable.
Your entire posts boils down to "I was arguing against you about exposure to certain american consumers, to your point about game innovation, while taking it as the same", again, when I didn't state otherwise in the first place - yes some consumers were exposed by x number of things with PSIV first - what does that have to do with anything I stated above? As one involves game development and developers (innovation - macros, cutscenes), the other to what certain public saw first time - exposure. It doesn't have to do anything. You switched up the argument. When my argument was that PSIV devs were influenced by innovators of the past, no innovating anything as far as I see it, themselves. Just reiterating. And even then, if we talk about exposure - PSIV doesn't stand out high on the ladder of exposure, and many other games effected the masses more.
How the public views innovation is a matter of exposure. That's what you're struggling with. You think the two are separate when they're directly related. It doesn't matter if someone comes up with an idea if they aren't the one to give the experience presence within the zeitgeist. Again, ask any American "What piece of media invented bullet time?" and 99.999% of them will answer "The Matrix". According to you, that's the wrong answer. According to 99% of Americans, it's the right answer. Who even originated bullet time is a matter of debate and opinion with no real answer because some people would label the concepts around bullet time that preceded it to be the "original".
My argument is that for the majority of US consumers, PS4 innovated those things for them and they would credit it with being their first exposure to it. I'm not arguing about who actually created it. This is a thread about US consumers and how they feel about SNES/Genesis era RPGs, so my arguments related directly to how that consumer base felt about the game.
Bruh, how does that counter anything I claimed? I never argued that some US consumers were exposed to certain elements in PSIV first because they played it first? Like, how are you this moronic.
Nothing you ever replied to me with countered my claims. You just got all assmad about the word innovation. I claimed PS4 was innovative. You disagreed and wanted to pick out individual examples of instances where its mechanics may have appeared before PS4. I clarified that they have individually existed before, but that the majority of the US audience saw them as innovations and as their first exposure to those things while pointing out that you misread my original post. You admitted you misread my post but then still wanted to argue about the word innovation. Now we're here where you realize I was never wrong to begin with, but you misunderstood me and you don't know what to do with yourself.
No, innovation is not the same as exposure, even if they can be linked. Like your example of Matrix:
>ask any American "What piece of media invented bullet time?" and 99.999% of them will answer "The Matrix". According to you, that's the wrong answer. According to 99% of Americans, it's the right answer.
is not a correct answer as pertaining to innovation, and again I tell you, you mix up exposure with it (or now claimed they're linked you so you can use the unteachably with dumb examples). They would be right in saying "I saw it first in Matrix, that was my first exposure to it" - which is correct to them, and is not the same as "Matrix invented it" - no it wouldn't be the "right answer". So dumb.
So I am correct in labeling you such an extreme autist that if someone claimed "The Matrix innovated bullet time," you would be enough of a pedantic dipshit to tell them they're wrong. These are the levels of extremes and lengths you have to go to to disagree with me, and I'm fine with ending the argument there as I've said and illustrated everything I need to.
>"The Matrix innovated bullet time," you would be enough of a pedantic dipshit to tell them they're wrong.
I wouldn't and you made up a scenario to feel better about while losing the argument. I don't give a frick about Matrix.
>These are the levels of extremes and lengths you have to go to to disagree with me
I stated posts and posts ago, how I am not, and never argued, that certain people get exposed to certain things first. While you, interjected, created a strawman, and started using the two terms interchangeably like a dumbass. These are not "such levels of extreme lenghts". Get the frick out of here with your hyperbolic nonsense.
>I wouldn't
You literally just did a post ago.
Someone is not you, on some Ganker argument about PSIV, by involving matrix into the argument to prove how you're correct in interchanging both terms - so I disagree with interchangeability and with you, not some person IRL, about matrix and bullet time itself - and obviously about your use of those things in the argument above. Don't be pedantic.
>Someone is not you
>You don't count, you're not a person
Interesting argument.
You a total moron. That's not how grammar works. Your statement in your
response, is not talking about yourself. Nor does "someone" means what you think it means in that context, if you think it includes you.
It's fun that you two are yelling at each other this much but even following it back quite a ways it's such an argument over semantics I can't even tell which side of what argument either of you are on.
tl;dr: Autismo slap fight over the word innovative where they don't realize you don't have to be the first to do something for it to be innovative.
>he cares about the gameplay in a JRPG
4 is alright but way better after coming off 1 and 2. Plus Chaz is sort of lame.
Now see Phantasy Star I remake on SNES
A lot of people talking about 2 like it's better than 4 but it really isn't. It broke more ground than 4 did but it's clunkier and objectively worse to play today in almost every way. It has more challenge but it also has an absolutely obnoxious encounter rate and your characters move like snails. The vast majority of players prefer 4.
Yeah, most people like 4 more. Unless you're really into giant maze dungeons, you'll probably like 4 more. Yeah it's easy, but so are most RPGs.
I wish it did, but it doesn't.
Fun Phantasy Star trivia: Lutz was supposed to be a hermaphrodite and could become a man or a woman depending on player's choices. Pic unrelated, but there's a phallus on it.
A futa like Lilith and Filia?
Would have been cooler if Zio had turned out to be a failed Lutz candidate.
Didn't the developers say he was in some kind of interview?
Yeah, zio felt like he was supposed to get more to make him less cartoony
I almost felt like they were setting up dark force for some kind of depth arc in a later game in general since Seth seemed like an innocent victim. A protagonist with a dark force infection seems very 5th gen
I'm not really invested enough to defend PS4 but it was fun to play once. It's definitely a lightweight experience though, e.g. they implemented a whole spell fusion system and never really require you to use it in case the layer isn't interested in using the "auto" functions. But that is what most people prefer in JRPGs ultimately since "players don't need to engage with every system, they're there if you're interested" was more common than not all through the rest of the history of the genre
PS3 had a better story and is the actual conclusion to the series, but I digress. Chrono Trigger will always be the best 16bit RPG. PS3 and 4 are better than FF4/6, but not quite as good as FF5 or Tales of Phantasia
I would also argue that Lunar 2 is better and on par with Chrono Trigger, but this entire thread is obviously console war bait and SCD is not directly comparable to SNES
I quite like the Phantasy Star series, but "THE GENESIS HAD THIS SUPER DUPER AMAZING RPG, PSIV!!!" has always been the Crash Bandicoot of the Genesis "We too have RPGs at home" cope
FF6 released like 5 months after in Japan and FF6 released a whole year before PSIV in the US
In comparison, the series looks sad as frick
I don't care to compare more of them. PS1 probably looked really advanced at the time by but PSIII the series really looked drab and outdated
Huh? Phantasy Star IV had better graphics than FF6. Way better graphics. I would think if we showed gameplay from both to people, they'd think PSIV looked more impressive.
Mog is a gym term.
>*mogs your favorite overhyped SNES jrpg*
No way, OP. The SNES is a JRPG powerhouse! It's got [squaresoft game], [tendie IP], [tendie IP]. There's [squaresoft game], [squaresoft game]. Um, hello? [squaresoft game]? This argument is over.
The SNES isn't like the N64. We have WAY more to play than just Mario, Zelda, and Rareware games. The SNES has Mario, Zelda, Metroid, and the list just keeps going.
Holy sperg melty lmfao
Skimmed thread, cons are:
>could have been longer
>not hard enough
>no gear grinding
>simple mazes
>no tile memorization
>innovation or something
Cool, will check it out. Do you JRPG degenerates have any more games that fall short?
Thats a nice way to measure quality: If the turbo spergs on this board hate it then it must be good
I played the first Phantasy Star and it was fricking shit
That's a hilarious take.
Nobody cares about your sperg fight and nobody is going to read those walls of text
This guy gets what I was hinting at. You both sound like spergs. I haven't seen any real praise or criticism of PS4 just weird yelling.
I just don't understand threads like this from the start. What point is there in debating something like FF6 vs PS4, they're both great jrpgs so if you like jrpgs you'll probably like them. Arguing over which system they came out on was largely pointless 30 years ago, now it's utterly redundant in every way.
People who never grew out of that teenager phase when they were surfing Gamegays and sperging out the threads until they hit 500. Embarassing to watch people over 30 still wasting so much time over what they like or don't and behaving like grown-up toddlers.
I played the first Phantasy Star and it was fricking kino
I think it's the best console 8 bit rpg by a country mile.
the fact that I could beat it without looking stuff up online is a testament to how well it holds up. it wasn't always easy figuring stuff out, but NPCs were fairly helpful considering how dated it is.
Phantasy Star and Final Fantasy III are the best 8-bit console RPGs that I've played. Dragon Quest III is great too, but I haven't gotten far enough in it to say for sure how it stacks up.
Haven't played DQIV yet unfortunately, looking forward to trying it. Mother is pretty sweet too.
I agree with this quite a bit. FF3 is my other favorite 8 bit RPG. I don't think it and PS1 are very comparable because they're so different like PS4 and FF6 but both are wonderful games. DQ3 is solid but I didn't like it quite as much. Can't speak for DQ4 as I only played the remake. It's a game I really disliked at first but stuck with it and the later half is much, much better.
>remaster
You didn't beat the game
not even a remaster; just a version with quality of life features and tweaked to be less grindy. it’s the best way for a newcomer to jump into the series without using online guides.
It's not grindy at all though. In fact if you try grinding you'll hit the level cap long before finishing. It's really not that hard anyways, and as for quality of life things it has more of those than most 8 bit rpgs.
Sorry I didn't find a thread about SNES but can someone tell me here if Chrono Trigger was ever released on SNES on Europe? Or is it only released for SNES in NA/JP?
It didn't get an official European release until the DS version.
I really need to play the first PS one of these days, it looks really fun; technically speaking I admit it's impressive and does some things which are rare or inexistant in Famicom RPGs like the animation during combat or moving in mazes.
I really can not stand the overbright Master System palette however, and that's going for someone who uses FCEUX's palette for NES emulation (it is brighter than the """official""" NTSC-U / J palettes) any recommendation for an emulator / palette setting ?
>Phantasy Star 2
>Rolf starts with a knife
>buy him a dagger
>he can't equip it
what the FRICK