Never played any saga game or octo game. But want to try them. So should I start with 1 or with 2 ? Is it difficult to get back to 1 when started with 2? Is 2 that much different compared to 1, where 2 is more fun?
Should I start with 1 or 2
Never played any saga game or octo game. But want to try them. So should I start with 1 or with 2 ? Is it difficult to get back to 1 when started with 2? Is 2 that much different compared to 1, where 2 is more fun?
I'll buy two in January or when it's 50% off. Haven't heard great things about 1.
It's a beautiful game with 8 different stories to play through. It's got a more childish cutesy way of telling stories which I wasn't a fan of, but it was fine. It almost felt anime like. It was a unique experience for me who has played games like Final Fantasy, Persona, Tales of Vesparia. This was very different. Which might be good or bad depending on your taste.
I wouldn't say I really loved it, I played like 4 of the stories to completion then stopped. Didn't even finish my main characters story. The only area it really stood out was the art. The snow area was amazing. Hard to score because the game wasn't really for me, but I respect it for what it is.
Translation: play Minstrel Song instead.
Pretty much.
I'm good with rs2 and 3. Can't have that artstyle Ministrel Song has, ewww.
>anime
My problem with all jrpg. Idk I never saw ff4 or the like as anime.
2 is my favorite of the bunch, great fricking game.
Yeah, the snes version is outdated IMHO, going for remaster. Both games are critically underrated.
Hope the fft remaster will trigger a renaissance in tactics games.
I should not have searched that
There is very little difference except that 2 has missions that team up two of the party members, where first game is essentially solo adventures (from a story perspective) with a party there for gameplay.
Other than that they're the same exact game. Start with 1.
But part 2 had more qol right? There are demos so I will test them. And the intersectioning stories sound more fun actually. Is it difficult to go back?
>But part 2 had more qol right?
No.
Compared to 1, YES, there are insane QoL improvements that make 1's mechanics feel outdated as hell. It is heavily required that you play OT1 before 2 because you will feel very awkward playing 1 after 2.
1) Hunter's Capture is changed so that monsters can be infinitely used until you choose to butcher them (This means infinite uses of Chubby Caits rather than having to use only it 3-4 times and butchering monsters means they become items which can provide numerous effects such as healing or buffing) You can only use 10 star monsters once per battle at a full boost.
2) Dancer's Allure allows the npc you allured to actually provide benefits when using a Dance Buff to a character (Recover HP/SP or even adding BP)
3) Completing the story of each character unlocks powerful abilities rather than just getting their own unique skill at a Shrine
4) There is an ability that makes a stat buff last indefinitely in battle after the buff is applied INCLUDING DIVINES, meaning that you can slap on Dohter's Charity and then use that ability to make that buff permanent.
5) Warrior class can now learn up to 5 skills by fighting NPCs
6) Dancer class can break shield points with a skill.
7) Cleric can use an ability that can recover SP which allows far greater synergy with the Scholar Class
Ewww, sounds like poor job battle system
The only thing in your list that's a *QoL* improvement is keeping monsters you like so you don't have to constantly recatch them.
I'm dumb, just scrolled onto these after I posted. Ignore me.
In that case I was lied to.
>a game with indie pixelart 2d spritework is $60
so this is the reality we now live in?
Don't buy games if they aren't at least 40% off. Better wait for 80%. That leaves the developer with like 4 bucks and that's OK with me.
Tried playing 2, and it ain't worth it, my friend. I had more fun playing with Squeenix's other titles than I even did with Octoslop 2, and that's AFTER I gave the old college try.
Worth 20 bucks or nah
20? I can get Cave Story for that amount, and I indefinitely respect that shit a hell of a lot more than Octoslop Travesty. 10 bucks at best.
Got it. Not sure if they go that low. Might wait for another year or two.
Or you can get Trials of Mana for twice that instead, and actually get your money's worth, either way Octopath isn't worth 20 bucks in my book.
>Trials of Mana
>for $40
>get your money's worth
kek
enjoy your babbys first arpg mobileslop i guess
>this motherfricker
>actually following me to a different thread for "le EBIC pwn!"
Go back to your containment Barry, and keep your shitty turn-based FFslop to yourself.
I'm not your boogeyman, anon, don't get too conceited now.
You only show your sub-Black person IQ by doubling down on "akshun good, turn-based bad", too.
Ok, but who tf asked? That comment was up for like half a week, then out of the blue you rag on Trials for no fricking reason, so I'd say you're the one who's conceited and obsessed, Barry.
>That comment was up for like half a week
You mean half a day?
>out of the blue you rag on Trials for no fricking reason
Sorry, couldn't ignore such sheer stupidity.
>Sorry, couldn't ignore such sheer stupidity
Uhh, no you're stupid for shitting on the Mana series Barry. Go back and play your FFslop now, this argument is over.
Apparently shitting on mobileslop with zero gameplay depth is stupid now. Lmao, go back to Ganker, they don't play the games there just like you.
Anon, this entire thread is about mobileslop. SaGa and Octopath are both this as well.
At least SaGa and Octopath actually require engaging with the gameplay systems beyond just mashing buttons.
and if you want to get real pedantic, Octopath literally isn't mobileslop
>muh button mashing argument
>again
You really won't give this up, will you moron? Unlike what you believe, the game's core combat loop actively discourages that kind of spamming, and I would know because I've actually played the game. Maybe if you weren't such a shitter, maybe you'd get that thru your thick fricking skull, and Mana combat would finally click for you.
Oh, sorry, every once in a while you get to press a skill button as well. So exhilarating! Such skill required!
No, you actually have actively use your abilities and team properly. Maybe if you played on any difficulty besides babby mode for the game journos, you'd understand that.
Bro I played it on hard and the only difference was that the enemies got more numerous and spongier. You're not fooling anyone.
>the only difference was that the enemies got more numerous and spongier
Funny how I could literally say the same thing about Octoslop Travesty, Barry. The same repetitive cycle of breaking an enemy's poise/super armor with little to no variety is just sooo exhilarating, isn't it? Such strategy and intellectual prowess on display here folks! IT'S NOT! It's boring as shit to play once the initial gimmick appeal wears off, and functionally no different from any other 4-homie-in-row menu-combat-simulator you fricking play. It's slop, and you're too much of a midwit homosexual to admit as much.
>breaking an enemy's poise/super armor
Thanks for admitting that in Triteness of Mana you don't need to do even that much. Not to mention that Octopath requires actual team building and game plan for specific bosses beyond just "spam your strongest attacks I guess".
>functionally no different from any other 4-homie-in-row menu-combat-simulator
And admitting you don't actually play the games you talk about again, how nice of you.
>Not to mention that Octopath requires actual team building and game plan for specific bosses beyond just "spam your strongest attacks I guess"
The opposite is true and you know it. Mana characters operate on a synergistic basis, and you have to actually time your abilities properly, and use any debuff you can get your hands on. Mana combat is what mmoslop WISHES it was, rather than devolving into asiaticclickitis like it always does. If you're going to keep trash-talking me like that, and make such disingenuous claims, then we're done here. I don't want to talk to you anymore, good day to you, anon. I hope you have a nice life, because I sure as hell don't want to see your ugly-ass around here again.
>keep trash-talking me like that, and make such disingenuous claims
Pot calling the kettle black much?
Lmao, imagine getting this buttblasted over a kiddy "akshun" "rpg" like that.
Cave Story used to be free and the "premium" edition used to be like 5 bucks.
still a vastly superior game than Octo imo.
Just saying don't spend that much.
I didn't make the rules, Nicalis did. I would have pirated it, but then I wouldn't have gotten the goodies that go with it otherwise. One of the best physical purchases I've made, besides maybe that used copy of Civ I got on sale one time.
On a side tangent, the music from the first game is pretty goated, so if you only care about the BGM, than go right ahead, I'm not stopping you, I just find it to be boring as shit to play.
Both octopaths are piratable, have had their Denuvo removed. Square's Denuvo contracts are for 6-8 months, so Live A Live's PC version is also available for pirating. Not DioFeld for some reason, not that anyone actually wants to play that.
Sadly Atlus' seem to be perpetual, hence why nobody has played Soul Hackers 2.
I was going to keep Soul Hackers 2 when I got it on a huge sale recently but I wasn't in the mood and wanted to spend my money elsewhere. I'll pick it up down the road.
I aim for 50%+ off anything I buy unless it's something I just want that day and don't want to wait. I have such a backlog.
1 is the better game with better worldbuilding and better OST, 2 looks more visually stimulating and has more animation variety.
I was really excited for 1 to come out when it did and felt fairly disappointed at the realization of characters not really interacting with one another and none of the stories really being all that engaging - the combat is really the only proper draw for me when it comes to the first game which i've still yet to finish
But coming from that, the 2nd game is a genuine improvement i'd feel, while not being a drastic overhaul and outdating the first games mechanics and such entirely, the addition of things like what are more or less limit breaks for each character and there being a good amount of skills that frick with turn order that you're always able to see up on the top make boss battles fun to do and plan out, the score is amazing and feels like proper effort after getting the same orchestral soundtracks game after game - and the stories in 2 feel consistently better written and don't go along the consistent thing that every story in 1 did, which was "introduce a character and oh turns out they're evil" and more or less be fairly predictable the entire time. 2 also doesnt have pure linear format with the way you follow each character path, some chapters split up into multiple areas and the merchant character has an exclusive set of side quests that open up a bonus area after finishing them. Its fun to play, VA ranges from pretty good->ok and considering all the range of overworld abilities and stuff like night/day that does surprisingly add some fun variety to how you mess with NPCs and also reveal some neat details about them, I feel properly engaged with the game in all its aspects, while 1 felt like I wanted to fall asleep now and then, so I recommend 2 and 1 if youre interseted in seeing how the series started, 2 in general as well was def made to be a bit more accessible with its gameplay and bonus content/jobs/etc
Alright thank you anon, I will try the demo for 2 and if I like it I buy it.
Well it is 3D, while I like games like bd1 with chibi 3d models and 2d backgrounds much more, I like this approach (never played a 2d-hd game). But I would have priced it 40bucks
There's not a lot those two series have in common with each other outside of OT games taking the multiple main character s gimmick and open progression, OT is more or less FF5/BD with a meaningless choice for which main character you want to play as, SaGa is a collection of games with largely different approaches to settings and mechanics but overall focus on a core rules etc that slowly evolves with time and focus on player freedom and experimental design.
Start with OT1, if you like what it does play OT2 and maybe take a peek at Romancing SaGa 3 remastered, or Minstrel Song remastered if you feel like your balls have dropped and you got hair on your chest, if you end up liking those then check out the rest.
If you think OT1 is too barebones definitely switch to SaGa but be warned the mechanics are completely different and progression has a lot less handholding and there's more to those games than meets the eye, a lot of content and choices are not immediately evident and certain mechanics tend to make some people nervous.
This damn game has such amazing OST and atmosphere.
OT2 does literally everything OT1 does but better. The stories aren't even related so there is no reason to ever play OT1 anymore.
This is such a stupid viewpoint.
It's true though. You can still go back to OT1 later if you want more of the same (but worse), but there is no reason to play 1 over 2.
There really weren't many QoL changes I can recall. Octopath 2 felt the exact same as one, other than the dual character storylines. That and the secret boss was easier to uncover.
What were the QoL changes between the first and second game, anons? I believe those saying they were there, but nothing stands out in memory. Again, games felt 100% the same to me.
That's not a bad thing either, I enjoyed both games a lot. The boost system is well done, and at least it doesn't look like garbage like Bravely Default. God BD is fricking trash.
he's right you homosexual. Also OT1 was $60 at launch and a complete ripoff.
Skip both tbh. Skip saga as well. You won't listen but you can remember that I warned you anyway.
Skip RPGs tbh. Skip video games as whole as well. You won't listen but you can remember that I warned you anyway.
They're mostly the same game.
Differences:
2 has better cutscene direction. There's more than one camera angle used and there's more action. The presentation is more dynamic.
As far as the actually content of the character stories, it's completely up to taste which game you'll like more.
2 gave the player several new combat toys (Latent abilities, Unique Skills, attacks that break any shield, Hikari's learn skills from NPCs thing) but outside of the super secret ultimate optional boss, they forgot to adjust enemy strength up to compensate so you get a mostly easier game. (they even made some broken stuff from 1 like Hired Help even more broken via the break any shield thing I already mentioned)
2 added a day/night cycle that doesn't really make the game better but does mean you spend twice as much time clearing out towns of their content. actually, even longer because there's secretly four times of day but they only let you quick swap between two of them
Oh, wait, actual big improvement that 2 has over 1:
They removed the Purple Chest mechanic where you couldn't open certain treasures without a specific character in your party.
play romancing saga 3. I would say 2 but playasia hoe'd me and I have yet to receive it and try it out.
as for octopath if you want a lot of classic JRPG team building goodness I would play both if not just play 2. both games have charming characters and addicting systems but I imagine 2 built a better world to explore and has better writing. I just beat 1 recently and I loved it but now I'm playing R Saga 3.
Not RPG.
Just play Saga Frontier
Octopath is better than SaGa Frontier, if only for the fact that you can do everyone's stories and see all other content in just one single playthrough, instead of 8 disjointed and sometimes heavily repetitive ones.
I enjoyed the Octo games for what they were, but they're definitely flawed games. I'd argue they're worth a playthrough if you can get them cheap or want to go the emulation route (both are on Switch, don't know how well they run admittedly), especially if you just like turn based stuff. $60 is a hard sell on a great game, let alone a decent one.
First game is ROUGH and has a lot of stumbling trying to find itself, but despite that I found it fun for just about everything except the final boss. Both games are easy, and the second game doesn't have much of a solution to that but the first game has some janky low-level capabilities if you don't mind the tedium of saving/loading every save point in-between towns. Steps to an encounter seem fixed between a certain amount, increased with Scholar's Evasive Maneuvers makes it so you can consistently reach the save point and Save/Loading resets it to the next screen, which also resets it. You can run very low level with that method if you like, it made bosses a lot more fun.
On the other side, Octopath 2 is just heads above a better game since they've found the niche they're going for. Adds on some simple mechanics, but not too many, expands on the basic premise a bit, but it also doesn't fix everything. It's harder to run low level, so you'll notice the difficulty ease up really quick (except for the superboss, frick that guy). But it's certainly one of those sequels that is focused on people that liked the first game, or at least the base of the first game. If you play Octo 1 and just completely hate it, I can promise that there's nothing in Octo 2 for you.
Hope you enjoy it if you do try it out, anon.