I find it funny about all the people talking about grinding in FF4, On the SNES version I never did any grinding unless I was farming for a rare weapon drop near the end of the game. I'm wondering how many people saying SMRPG is the better game would have even played it if it didn't have Mario in it.
Flandre Scarlet, she's cute, she's colorful, she can blow up entire cities, she's also a vampire. Start running sparklepants.
The thing is, the DS version is a lot harder afaik. I've had to grind lots in the later underworld parts, and I can't get past the four fiends (all at once) battle at all. Lots more grinding needed. It's funny, I just got done grinding my characters like crazy in one part until I could kill the local enemies with ease, then in the next area the enemies are again 5x stronger than me D:
FF II wins in story, control and nostalgia. The story was epic at the time the game was introduced. I had never played a game before that was so grand in scale. It wins in control only in comparison to SMRPG because It was tougher to play SMRPG due to its isometric perspective. FF II also holds a fond place in my memories. To answer what was mentioned by someone else here, I clearly remember needing to grind for levels in FF II SNES for places especially towards the end of the game. I don't know how some of you would be able to get through the harder areas or fighting the harder bosses without doing so.
SMRPG wins in gameplay, humor, replayability, and graphics. SMRPG was far more engaging than FF II when it came to gameplay. You could interact with the world much more, also you needed to time your attacks in battle instead of just hitting the A button and the minigames sprinkled throughout were quite fun as well. It was a very funny game, Mario didn't talk at the time, so he needed to mime to get things across. There was a lot of humor in the dialogue and slapstick too, it was a funny game. After beating the game, it wasn't an ordeal replaying the game for things you missed or secrets or replaying the minigames, it felt fun throughout. Although I hated the isometric graphics for the play style, I thought the graphics were extremely well done at the time.
The audio was well done in both games, they fit their games respectively, its hard choosing between the two since they were two different styles with FF being your typical FF-fare and SMRPG being quite cheerful and melodic throughout.
If I have to pick which is the better game to me...I'd say FF II, nostalgia plays a huge part, but I felt the overall journey in that game was better. Even at the time, SMRPG was made for someone younger than I was, so although it was a really well built game, I really don't hold it in such high regards in my memories.
TL;DR = FF II
What is the meaning of life? That's so easy, the answer is TETRIS.
Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars is much better. Final Fantasy IV (jap) or Final Fantasy II (us) is the second worst video game I ever played. E.T. is the only game I disliked more than this Final Fantasy game.
Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars is much better. Final Fantasy IV (jap) or Final Fantasy II (us) is the second worst video game I ever played. E.T. is the only game I disliked more than this Final Fantasy game.
What don't you particularly like about it?
Edgey, Gumshoe, Godot, Sissel, Larry, then Mia, Franziska, Maggie, Kay and Lynne.
I'm throwing my money at the screen but nothing happens!
Forums
Topic: Final Fantasy IV vs. Super Mario RPG - which is the better game?
Posts 81 to 92 of 92
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.