Topic: Xenoblade Chronicles 2

I agree with this post. It should have better tutorials (you should learn by doing, not by reading), and some functions could have been better implemented, such as how to start a battle (it's counter intuitive to first have to hold down R to target the enemy, then have to release it before you can press A to start fighting).

@Agriculture I definitely don't disagree that the game is flawed in a number of ways it didn't need to be. Like the compass that makes it basically impossible to tell where you need to go to get somewhere, which is unhelpful considering how complex and interconnected some of the landmasses are in this game. I'm also fundamentally not fond of the RNG system for finding new rare blades. And... I have a love/hate relationship with the way field skills are implemented in the game. While I like developing a blade's affinity chart and using that to unlock new areas and opportunities, like in a Metroidvania, I got VERY frustrated early on, as side-quests kept skillgating me and preventing me from continuing.

It could definitely be improved in ways that made it more user-friendly without casualizing or Westernizing it. If THAT is what you're talking about, then I agree. I think the game was probably rushed out the door before it was fully polished, and now the devs are having to polish it via post-launch patches, which isn't ideal.

Regarding targeting enemies... I usually just run up to the one I want to fight, click R, and then hit A. I almost never bother holding the R button or cycling between enemies.

@Yorumi Couldn't disagree more. The cast and story of Xenoblade Chronicles 2 is easily the best in the series. Moreover, the mechanics aren't terribly hard to understand, they're just not explained well in some instances. Also, the combat systems in Xenoblade games are pretty unique regardless. There's going to be a learning curve either way.

@Yorumi No? They're all multi-faceted characters and develop throughout the game. The characterization here is leagues better than it was in the other Xenoblade games.

@Agriculture The Vita failed for multiple reasons, one being that they ONLY had JRPGs and indies. You attract people through a wide swath of games. The Switch isn't popular because Zelda is on it, it's popular because it has Zelda AND Mario (platformer), Splatoon (shooter), ARMS (fighter), Mario Kart (racing), and Xenoblade (JRPG), along with more on the horizon like Smash Bros (platform fighter) and Fire Emblem (strategy RPG). If it just had games like Xenoblade, of course it's going to fail. The Wii U failed for similar reasons, one being that a huge majority of the excellent games on it were platformers like 3D World and Tropical Freeze. Third-parties have also jumped onto the Switch scene, not just indies but a few AAA third-parties too, and this is going to only grow as we go along. The Vita and Wii U failed because of the lack of options while the Switch and PS4 thrive because of said options.

Western and Japanese developers also have very different design philosophies that don't inherently make them better or worse than the others. With the type of game Xenoblade is, a lot of "Western" stuff wouldn't mesh well with the system they're going for with all the systems that layer on top of each other. The only flaw with the tutorials in the game is the fact you can't revisit them at all, something both Xenoblade 1 and X fixed already.

@Yorumi There are problems with the narrative and characters, yes. I have my issues with how some plot points are dropped too quickly and a lack of "show, don't tell" for certain scenes while having some sloppy storytelling at specific points, which puts the game's story quite a bit below Xenoblade 1 and Xenogears for me. However, I wholeheartedly disagree about the characters being one-dimensional. The only ones that can be considered poorly developed characters out of the cast is Dromarch and Pandoria, mainly because they don't get much screentime. Everyone else gets the screentime they need where they all develop properly.

@Yorumi In that they develop shades of nuance within the broad scope of their characterization. Nia and Pyra, for example, have basic assumptions and attitudes of theirs fundamentally shaken or altered through the course of the game.

1. The Switch is doing much better than the PS Vita did, and of course that has multiple reasons. One of the reasons were that they relied too much on visual novels and JRPGs. I'd hate to see the Switch do the same mistake.

2. I'm sort of with Phil Fish on this one, Japanese developers need to step up their game. They can't just say "it's our philosophy" when not making organic gameplay where they player naturally learns. Especially when Nintendo is involved, the company that made Super Mario Bros 1-1, a level where the player learned everything he would need in a natural way. Of course 3D RPGs can't achieve that level of natural learning because they are simply too complex, they can however do a better job than XBC2.

3. Variety is of course good, but the biggest profile releases can't be niche products. XBC2 is one of the biggest profile releases for the Switch, and it's not very welcoming to new players.

Speaking of variety, I would really like it if Nintendo brought back Wave Race. Aqua Moto Racing Utopia isn't really cutting it.

@Agriculture
1) That's literally what I said and even compared it to the Wii U's problem of having too much platformers as its main part of the good games.

2) Do they? And some games don't lend themselves as easily to "organic" gameplay, especially when dealing with a game like Xenoblade with multiple systems in play. Comparing a platformer with an RPG is like comparing a loaf of garlic bread with a pizza with multiple toppings.

3) They very well can be. Who cares if it's niche? As long as enough people give it a shot and it gets enough attention, that's perfectly fine. Consumers know what they're getting into, and if they're not interested there's a bevy of other games to play. Good games sell themselves, but more exposure helps even more. It's how we get more games like Bayonetta 3 on the horizon.

1. The PS Vita didn't have "just JRPGs", it had other games too. It's not black and white, and the Switch could easily fall into the trap of relying too much on JRPGs. My point was that the PS Vita had lots of problems, and too many JRPGs that aren't friendly to new players was one of those problems.

2. XBC2 could have handled it with enemies that tested the skill. You'll only be able to finish this enemy if you hit it from the side with the spinning sword attack.

3. A new console needs a handful of mainstream games to get enough of an install base. The Switch has been out for over a year now. So, let's assume Average Joe bought a Switch last summer. He has bought Breath of the Wild, Odyssey and Mario Kart. Now he's looking for another action adventure game, and XBC2 is the game that is out now. He loads it up and immediately run into a wall of text that explains something about blades, combos and drivers.

I wouldn't even be complaining about this, if it wasn't for the fact that it's one of the few high profile exclusives for the Switch so far. Nintendo has always done a great job to ensure their games are approachable, and as publisher for this game, they could have done more to ensure it was better presented.

@Agriculture
1) Ok, so? The Wii U also didn't have just platformers too, what's the point of this anyway? This isn't a JRPG problem, it's a centralizing on one genre problem.

2) Maybe they could have done it that way. On the other hand, if you're not going to make use of what you're given and ignore all the stuff the game gives you, a lot of the blame is going to go on the player. One failing of Xenoblade 2 is the lack of going back to tutorials, but aside from that they tell you everything you need to know and it's all drip-fed so you don't get overwhelmed.

3) So? The niche games are coming alongside the mainstream games. We're getting Fire Emblem AND Smash, etc. Also, if someone is going to buy a game without knowing what they're getting themselves into, that's also on them because Xenoblade 2 is not action-adventure like Zelda.

And who cares if Nintendo published the game? Did we need to raise a stinker when Metroid Prime or BotW released with their more open gameplay? Target audience is also important. They're not expecting people who play Mario or Smash to suddenly also just jump into Xenoblade or Metroid. If people can't be bothered to do some basic research, they're out of their mind.

@Yorumi
I don't really agree with that statement, honestly, unless we're talking about Xenoblade X. In terms of gameplay they feed into each other fairly well.

In Xenoblade 1 everyone has their "class" and set of Arts which complement that class, and doing autoattacks generally fills up their Talent Art which is among their best. Break -> Topple -> Daze is a core status element that works on 95% of enemies, and they give you the tools to make sure you can use them consistently and give strategic uses for them.

Xenoblade X is the biggest culprit in that it actually doesn't tell you anything within the game, only giving you a manual and shrugging its shoulders. Overdrive was also never explained. In a way however, this could potentially be refreshing to some if people want to simply just go as they please, but it's definitely not for everyone.

Xenoblade 2 though, also gives you classes (but lets you mix them up per character) and has the natural progression of autoattacks -> Arts -> Specials -> Chain Attacks introduced throughout the game up to mid-Chapter 3, while also allowing one of the core status effects of the series, Driver Combos (Break -> Topple etc), to be stacked on-top of that layer.

Walls of text? In an RPG? Heaven forbid.

This is not a JRPG thing; it's an RPG thing - western, Japanese, Korean, Martian, whatever. People who play RPGs, as a loose, general rule, don't mind reading. I don't see it as a fault, and think it's weird that someone else would. You definitely have a point about the way they breeze through the tutorials, though.

Also agreed, anyone who came into Xenoblade Chronicles 2 looking for another fix of Zelda is going to be sorely disappointed. But XC2 is an RPG, not an action adventure. Anyone who came to XC2 looking for more Splatoon, Mario Kart or Odyssey would also be pretty peeved. And vice versa.

I keep responding - I don't know why. There are so many reasonable responses, but nobody looks like changing your mind. But hey, it's your mind. Have fun with it!

XC2 has a lot of flaws, but an "overly complex" battle system isn't one of them.

My gripes with the game are more the annoying compass, the bad sound design (the music is awesome, but the mix is sometimes horrible with the music drowning out the dialouge, as is some of the delivery from the voice actors) and an inconsistent tone in the story telling, with it jumping wildly between being serious and not (and sometimes the soundtrack doesn't help, as the music sometimes really doesn't fit the mood of a scene).

Dumbing down the battle system would make the game dull. Sure, there are a lot of things to keep track of, but once you get the hang of it, it's very satisfying, even though I can see it's not for everyone, but does it has to be? There should have been a way to be able to view some kind of battle guide ingame, but that's a minor complaint from me. Overall, I think the system is good and some other people have said it better than I in this thread.

I have never seen a wall of text in Xeno2 in my 350h of gameplay.
My tutorial texts were always only a few lines long.

While the tutorials could definitely be improved upon, the solution isn't turning the Xenoblade franchise into some kind of BotW style clone.

The endgame of most genres appears to either be a BotW style open world adventure or a multiplayer game stripped of its personality to be suitable for esports which is sad especially as when it's successful the developers tend to avoid returning to the older styles.

So, I finished the game. The ending cutscenes were cool and all: I enjoyed watching them on YouTube when my game started stuttering and crushed after the final boss fight.

What annoys me is that, looking online, this particular problem is months old.

As much as I loved this game (and I really did enjoy it: the best JRPG I've played in a loooooooooong time. I'm even prepared to say I like it more than Persona 5, and I bought a PS4 for that game), it could have used another half-year in the oven.

I ended up fighting the final boss a SECOND time and skipping the last cutscene, which allowed me to save my game so that I can eventually start a New Game+ playthrough.

Am I alone in thinking that the fight against Amalthus was significantly more difficult than the final boss fight? I died to that particular boss multiple times, but I killed the last boss on my first go both times (with a full burst no less, which is a pretty epic way to finish him off).

Oh, and while I absolutely loved the ending before the credits, that Hollywood-esque scene DURING the credits can go take a hike. It completely removes the gravity and emotion previously established by Pyra's sacrifice and Rex's ultimate step into adulthood when he had to learn to "let go." I hate when stories try to manipulate the audience with a heroic sacrifice and then pull back from it at the very last second because they don't want to commit to ending things like that!.

So, yeah, it didn't entirely nail the landing for me. But still: absolutely amazing game overall. Easily the funnest Switch exclusive I've played so far, and I expect it to stay that way for quite a while.

@Ralizah I agree it needed more time to fix the bugs but looking at what the 2018 lineup has become, I don't think there was really the option for it.

@Grumblevolcano I don't see why it couldn't have released in early 2018. Would probably have been a much more polished product, and it would have taken the edge off of 2018's disappointing release schedule on Switch so far.

don't worry guys, i don't have a switch currently, so i'll only be able to play xenoblade 2 after all these updates anyway

that's the important part, as we all know :V

As I recall, when Mario + Rabbids first came out, the final part of the game was also pretty glitchy, and the final boss fight actually crashed a few times before I managed to get through it.

What's up with my favorite Switch exclusives all being glitchy messes early on?

@Ralizah Yeah, this game was definitely rushed, and it frustrates me because of that. The story has my biggest complaints in the game and I think a big part of that was because they had to rush it. Ah well, it's still pretty good and they nailed the characters, so I'm satisfied enough but still sort of disappointed.

As for the final boss, it was generally pretty easy, yes. Amalthus was harder to a degree. In general just like Xenoblade 1 though, the game is pretty easy. (Xenoblade X was pretty challenging, though both in good and bad ways)

The ending, well. Generally among the people I talk to and the other forums I browse, it's a bit split in that some people hate it, others loved it, and some like me can see either side but ultimately can lean either way. I mentioned this in another thread here, but for my expanded thoughts: I think they've already foreshadowed that in Chapter 7 that they can come back back when Malos talked about how Pyra could be able to survive for a short while without their Core Crystal, transferring her half back to Rex. I don't think it's not entirely explained that they could come back afterwards, but once that happened when she transferred her Core Crystal half to Rex I was thinking "they're not gonna kill her". But for bigger reasons I think the post-ending scene makes sense are a few things: it still develops Rex as a character and it complements the optimistic and hopeful theme the game goes with. I'll explain the first: throughout the game he makes dumb decisions because he doesn't want to stand by idly while other people are in danger, eg Vandham and how he messed up there. In Chapter 7, Addam calls out Rex, saying he's greedy in wanting to protect everyone and telling him there's a limit to how much someone can do so. So during that scene, he decides to do the complete opposite of what pre-Chapter 7 Rex would have done and it turns out everything would have worked out. If it didn't work out, it would have been casted doubts on Rex thinking if he would have done the right thing, where he tries to avenge Vandham's death but fails, and he lets Pyra go but stays dead, so by association he fails too. For the second reason: the villains all have nihilism as their main motivations. Amalthus wants the whole world destroyed while he claims the Architect's power, Torna want to kill the Architect and humanity because of being wronged, etc. Even Klaus felt the nihilist thoughts when he resigned himself to letting Amalthus take the Aegis Cores, only to be reversed after seeing Rex and Pyra. And in Chapter 7, the real reason why Pyra/Mythra want to go to Elysium is to die, but that changes after the chapter. Conquering nihilism is a running theme of the game, and killing them off would go against it in my opinion.

I hope I worded that in a concise way. I get carried away when talking about this series. (I'm a self-proclaimed shill, it's in the signature)