Topic: Xenoblade Chronicles 2

Yes, I know, I was just simplifying to not cause confusion. Regardless, it's not good game design.

The market has already made it's choice against such games, and they are clearly less popular than simpler games. Every now and then, there is an attempt to make overly complicated jrpgs become mainstream in the west, and it always fails. They should just simplify the games and more people will buy them.

@Agriculture You're also assuming that every game should be made for the mainstream, which is just dumb. Not every game should be made for everyone, and with that comes appropriate budgeting and expectations. It's the reason why a lot of "AAA" games need millions to even begin recouping costs while other games like Hellblade: Senua's Sacrifice only needed 500k copies to break even as a $30 AA title.

@Agriculture All a game needs to be a success is to make a profit and satisfy its audience. Xenoblade 2 is popular within the niche demographic it's targeting, and it's the best selling Xeno game to date. It doesn't need to make blockbuster money.

Also, we don't all like Western games designed for the lowest common denominator.

And, no, the game design isn't terrible just because you refuse to read tutorials. If you want to be babied, play something else.

The Switch could have used a mainstream success instead of a complex jrpg right now.

@Agriculture But the Switch has plenty of mainstream successes - why is it not also allowed complex JRPGs? I guess you simply don't like the game, or perhaps the genre, but a very large niche of people do. Or should Nintendo make only games that are to your personal taste?

I don't like driving games, but I'm not going to go on a popular driving game thread and complain that they shouldn't have bothered with it and should have made another "complex" JRPG instead.

Have I satisfactorily risen to your bait? 😋

The Switch had Breath of the Wild as it's action adventure mainstream success, but it was a long time ago. They should have simplified Xenoblade Chronicles for the west. It's a decent game, but it's not good game design to have so many tutorials with walls of text.

About 50 hours in and coming to the end of chapter 4 so here are some of my feelings.

Main quests are good with a story that seems to hit a good pace and tells a good tale with some nice moments so far. The heart to hearts build the characters really well. Some of the side quests are good but I have lost interest in the fetch quests if it randomly tells me I have gathered enough of something to finish one I hand it in but looking for items is just a boring process.

The game does a pretty good job of explaining itself. As a fairly regular player of JRPGs I've found it fine but I can see why genre novices would struggle it does worry me that being the flagship JRPG of the Switch it will put genre novices off of the genre and that a lack of mainstream success could impact on budget for a sequel and other big JRPGs. The battles do often out stay there welcome sometimes I dread entering areas where I know I will just have to grind through enemies whilst not being challenged in the slightest.

Graphically the game looks good enough it does the job without doing to much to really excite. The design of the cities is great feeling like living places and some of the titans have been great to explore the actual character and enemy design cannot be faulted it's top notch and I look forward to seeing what else is in store going forward.

The soundtrack is great with some awesome themes in the mix. The use of regional accents is great really surprised how they have been used I had heard a lot of complaints but it's nice hearing the kind of accents that don't usually make it into western games. My only complaint is some of the battle chatter gets a bit samey after a while but in a game of this length that was going to be inevitable.

Tiger Tiger is just awful.

I think it's a bit simplistic to say a game only needs to be profitable and popular with it's fanbase to be considered a success. This is the real world and this is a big company that exists to make money big money not some indie studio happy to get by.

Yes, and not only for the game's profit itself. It's one of the Nintendo Switch's big exclusive games, therefor it would be better if it was more friendly towards the general consumer. If an average person buy a Switch, they'll get games like Mario Kart and Breath of the Wild, but then they want more games, and if they decide to get Xenoblade Chronicles 2, they might get put off by it since it's too complex.

@bluemage1989 Not every game is going to make big money. Nintendo doesn't expect Xenoblade to make big money. They likely acquired Monolith Soft to diversify their level of output and bring in people who wouldn't necessarily be excited for the Mario/Zelda/Pokemon games that do sell tens of millions of copies.

Taking beloved small developers who make rich gameplay experiences and then forcing them to streamline and homogenize their game design to appeal to the masses is what companies like EA do. It's horrible. Not everything has to be focus group-approved and sell 10 million copies. I'm frankly thankful that Nintendo and Sony seem intent on bringing a diverse array of software to their systems.

@Agriculture And why is that a bad thing? I repeat: not every game should be designed to appeal to the mainstream. They already have their big blockbusters that sell the system, then they supplement those games with other core games that compels people to stick around. Maybe Mario and Zelda don't sell systems on their own. But a combination of Splatoon, Fire Emblem, and Metroid along with everything else would eventually. Xenoblade 2 is a big exclusive game for the Switch because it's a fantastic game that can sell Switches along with other games, not because it appeals to the masses.

Developers should not be forced to streamline their games to appeal to a broader audience. Similarly, developers should not be forced to cater to niches to appeal to the diehards only if they want a game to primarily be accessable. Different games go for different goals, so asking the developers to stray from their goals is bullocks.

@Ralizah not every game is going to make big money but frankly if anyone running a conpany is not trying to maximise how much is being made they shouldn't be working at these companies. Ultimately these companies are not our friends there not making these games to please us there doing so to make money and after trying to return to the original formula as opposed to X's didn't really ignite sales I can see them going for something more mainstream in appeal. Being mainstream shouldn't be seen as a bad thing appealing to lots of people is a sign of success and it doesn't mean having to lose what makes a game great or unique plenty of games sell millions of copies without selling out (as an example Animal Crossing) and I can't see why anyone would want to see a game not succeed as much as possible. As for Xenoblade its not very complex but having some decent tutorials hurts no one and if it helps get more people into the series all the better.

@bluemage1989 I think you're confused. Nobody is saying the game shouldn't have decent tutorials. Plenty of people, myself included, have criticized how little the game tells you about some of its systems (it's an on-going issue with the Xenoblade games, although, in fairness, this game is WAY better about explaining itself than the often mystifying Xenoblade Chronicles X). We're saying that the core game design should not be simplified to chase after mass market appeal when it's already making plenty of money off the people Nintendo knows are interested in it. Xenoblade Chronicles 2 is the best-selling Xeno game to date. Does that means it's selling tens of millions of copies like Zelda or Mario? No. And it doesn't need to. That's not the market for it. It's succeeding within the niche that it's designed to appeal to.

There's nothing wrong with a game designed to be mainstream appealing to the mainstream. There is also nothing wrong with a game designed to be niche mostly appealing to that niche. The world of gaming would be much poorer if only experiences catering to normies were out there.

If the game is selling well for what it is, and fans are happy with it, then, yes, it's a success by any reasonable standard of the word.

While other plattforms have their own problems (microtransactions, and a standardization of major releases) the bar has been raised quite significantly, with large releases like Far Cry 5 and Assassin's Creed Origins coming every year.

I get that this is a Nintendo fan forum, but you have to be able to be critical of business decisions Nintendo makes. Sony did the something similar with the PS Vita, and it failed both in Europe and North America. What I mean is that the Vita got lots of complex JRPGs, which made some westerners very happy, but it wasn't enough to carry the console.

I'm enjoying the game, but I do see a lot of flaws with it that could have been corrected if it had been developed for a more western audience. Lots of the flaws with the game are cardinal sins if you're asking western game developers. Things like the previously mentioned wall of text tutorials, the large number of systems of attack, the quick time events.

All I'm saying is that it's a shame they went this route with this game, since it will scare away lots of consumers in the west.

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.