Topic: The Nintendo Switch Thread

@darkfenrir I'm a bit confused by that, because there is quite a bit of variance. Nia and Morag are just like that, Pandoria as well, etc. The only really big ones are Pyra/Mythra and Dahlia, maybe Vale and a few others. Looking through all of the Rare Blades there's a bunch of visual diversity.

@EvilLucario Yeah, that's why it felt like it has a lot of huge chested ones when it doesn't. I don't understand it myself, since once I try to think of it, I'm quite sure the one with Bear and some others have quite normal chest...

Maybe it's because I saw Pyra/Mythra a whole lot that it's ingrained in my memories?

But nonetheless, this is more of... something I felt from the game then, than what it is true. In the end I enjoy the game, and now I need to finish my 2 JRPG before the Torna's DLC come out smh.

@EvilLucario Another issue for me is how overly complicated everything seems. Even after reading the manual and playing 35+ hours, it just... I don't know, I feel like I only half-understand a lot of stuff. It's a cool game, but it's desperately in need of better tutorials and some streamlining.

@Ralizah I said I like X combat.....the UI can go X itself.

@EvilLucario XC1 was simple enough that it didn't really need much explanation. It was a traditional party system, fairly linear arts us, and a basic break/topple/daze loop. XC2 went not only into more battle complexity, but also more spread out disconnected systems that were never explained. You say they were, but they weren't. Not in a context that made them meaningful. The information "being there" isn't enough if needs to be digestible and contextual. The game failed, catastrophically on the latter front, and marginally on the former front. It remains a great game marred by failure in introducing you in how to use it. I understood nothing about the battle system, chains, etc until your single post explained it far better than anything in the game....that had moving examples and input reading ability.....failed to do. If you can explain it on an internet forum in a single post with far better understand-ability to the player than the game manages to do with the ability for interactive tutorials, the game is clearly at fault.

@Octane XC2 voice acting is nice...I find it charming. Way better than the first one. I'm really feeling it. What time is it? Swapping Rikki for Tora alone is worth $60.

@Knuckles-Fajita Ok, well disliking fantasy blocks out a ton of games, but that's at least fair preference
I suppose it can feel slow. Well in the beginning it can feel slow. Questing is slow. (Gawd, the merc mission quests....)

Yeah, it's not borderline HM blocking, it is HM blocking. I didn't even understand that field skills existed or how they worked until I was hard story-gated half-way through the game

" know when a game wont do it for me."
So, what you're trying to say is you're not really feeling it?

@Ralizah XCX is probably the posterchild of it. I love the game and will defend a bunch of its faults, but even as my third favorite game of all time I'm not afraid to say it has more flaws than either Xenoblade 1 or 2.

Overcomplicated mechanics and features may be one such thing I suppose. Although I'd argue it's not so much the overcomplicated stats and such, but more in that game balance is kinda wack. Defense is pointless, what you actually want are resistances... but there are six types of elements and it's a bunch to keep track of for a bunch of enemies. It can get pretty overwhelming.

I could probably spend an hour or two talking about the stuff I hate in XCX tbh lol. But the huge world, combat, gameplay loop, sidequests, and overall feel of the game instantly launched it into my top 5 games of all time despite all those problems.

@darkfenrir I'm convinced the player base is like this:
What adolescent males see in Xenoblade Chronicles 2: Breasts.

What adult males see in Xenoblade 2: A flawed game with a lot of redeeming qualities and hideously annoying Pokemon-HM style field skills.

What adult females see in Xenoblade 2: Breasts.

@EvilLucario You summarize for me that the Xeno series overall is very deeply flawed and unpolished in a lot of ways. It's a yin & yang thing. It does so many glaring things so very wrong it's beyond excusing, and yet it does so many things so uniquely right you have to try to look past the flaws because it's the only place you can experience that....so you kind of put up with a game mediocre in so many important ways to enjoy the unique things it does so well.

@NEStalgia Well I mean, if I try hard enough I can complain about any game I want for over 30 minutes. Even my two favorite games of all time, Metroid Prime and Super Metroid: I'm going to complain about how bad of an area Magmoor Caverns is for being literally just a backtracky area and being the only way into Phendrana Drifts when putting an elevator that takes you to Tallon Overworld would have cut down on the actual tedious backtracking. And for Super Metroid, the run button being the way it is just plain flat-out sucks. Among more things.

It's not so much as a game being "flawed" as much as "what does this bring to the table" if you ask me.

@NEStalgia ROFL. It probably is true It's still very fun game though, definitely what pushes me into Monolith Soft believer.

(I can't wait for their next game! It looks very fantasy-like)

@NEStalgia Field Skills existed in X but were upgraded in a much more straight forward fashion, and were only used for opening treasure chests in the world. It was never a "HM to progress" like it is in 2 nor is it as awkward to upgrade.

But yeah, I dont enjoy fantasy settings much. Dunno why. Slap some scifi in there though...yum.

I think giving up on a game if it hasn't grabbed you within 6 hours is completely understandable. Just because it lasts 200 doesn't mean it doesn't have a responsibility to hook people in as soon as possible. Reminds me of people that justify FF13's flaws by saying it takes 30 hours to get to the "good" part. And I say this as a fan of both games.

@MisterPi At the same time, a lot of fantastic games are what we call "slow burn" games that need a bit of time to "click". It doesn't just apply to 50+ hour long games; take something like Bayonetta (a 10 hour game), where on your first playthrough you may fumble around button mashing and die a bunch, but once you get better and better you can start pulling off slick combos. The real joy of Bayonetta and other action games like Devil May Cry and Ninja Gaiden is going back to replay levels and get better scores, and the fun really multiplies itself on the second or even third playthrough.

Liking a slow burn is a different story and it's fine if people don't like it, but it is what it is.

@MisterPi I agree with this sentiment. I remember my buddy saying the same thing about FF15. If it takes 20 - 30 hours to get good that just seems like a colossal waste of time imo.

Tfw people saying certain games took X hours to get good, meanwhile XC2 hooked me in from the start (Fluffy cloud sea, I can't resist, and Titans definitely hooked my interest even more).

FF15 is also another one I enjoy straight from the start to the end (Although I can't say anything about the game before Royal Edition).

That's the interesting thing about games like those. Sometimes people are hooked in immediately, other times it just fails. XC2 couldn't hook me in but XCX and XC1 did within the first battles.

@MisterPi XC2 has deep flaws in its systems and instructions. FFXIII was simply bad for 30 hours. The systems were actually decent. The game was just bad.

@Knuckles-Fajita "But yeah, I dont enjoy fantasy settings much. Dunno why. Slap some scifi in there though...yum."

So...uhm...about that........

@darkfenrir @redd214 I agree about FFXV. I've been doing a "whitmans sampler" of trying the beginning, like a demo, of all the games I've collected on sales. FFXV is one I keep thinking often about and will probably be near the top of the list of games to go into fully.

@NEStalgia Nah, it was a good enough game. People just didn't like that it was linear. Granted there are plenty plenty of other flaws, but to call it outright bad is something that makes zero sense to me. It's not even a discussion I have the energy to have, so I'm just leaving it at that.

@NEStalgia Well, the science fiction has to outweigh the fantasy. Part of why I dont play western RPGs.

@MisterPi Xenoblade is linear. FFX is linear. FFXIII is on rails more than Doom which kind of breaks RPG encounters in general. The battle system was solid, but the idea that the game was more or less a sequence of battles like a mobile game before mobile existed is what made it "bad." Perhaps the game wasn't bad, but as an RPG it was bad. It was like a turn-based version of Infinity Blade. Not that Infinity Blade isn't fine for what it is, but that's not a game within reasonable expectations for FF.