Grandia> Skies

[Tracer]

Originally posted by Tsubaki
While I absolutely love the presentation of Valkyrie Profile, I actually find the battles extremely limited cuz once you find your combo, you pretty much do the same thing every battle until you get a new party member, or get a new weapon. Strange how everyone loves the VP battle system, but I think it's the only weak link in the game.

SO2 is flawed IMO because it's real-time. Part of this is the action-oriented vs strategy-oriented preference, but the second part is that SO2 has AI-controlled characters which further screws up any strategy you want to employ, so you're often fighting against your stupid party AI as well as the enemy. (Ditto with Tales series)

Bully that, you can control them all if you're into that. You can stop time and switch characters, asign thier move and thier guage will determine when they cast it. Proficencey and speak speed have a LOT to do with you strategy and you can't beat the boss so easily without assigning your charater to to do one thing because the other would kill them. It's not like you're controling one guy and AI takes over. You can reasonably control them all. It's just that menial battles won't require you to because they're of little consequence (watch out for some disaster monsters though... petrify your whole party without you having time to react.. sucks).

SO2 = Best PSX RPG I have played. And I've played a few.

[Yoshi]

Originally posted by Ranji
Still, Grandia 1 should be a part of this conversation. Or perhaps part of another thread contrasting it (favorably) with Final Fantasy VII.

Amen to that. Don't forget the also favorable comparison of Lunar TSS and/or EB to Final Fantasy IV and/or VI.

[Shine]

I havent played Grandia 2 through to the end but I was impressed, SOA also impressed me, especially after I was turned off by the demo. As for the superior game, I'd say that they're about equal. They both have their low points but they're both good games.

[Jeremy]

Grandia II is utter shit next to Skies, although I picked it up for $10, so I got my money's worth out of it. The characters were just too damn insipid, and the gameplay wasn't much fun, which made progressing through a game a dreadful bore. Skies, on the other hand, has fantastic characters and some innovative, and fun gameplay.

[Leynos]

I don't know why people slag off the story in Grandia II so much. It had strong characters, and a plot that surprised me a few times as it was told. I can't see where these plot holes are that people talk about, because it seemed to all make sense to me. Grandia II was the last RPG I could be bothered playing to the end, and that was partly because I was enjoying the story so much that I wanted to see how it ended. Skies of Arcadia seems nice, but I got sick of the random battles every twenty seconds, and left it. Maybe I should try the Gamecube version tho.

Later.

[StriderKyo]

Originally posted by Kidnemo
I hated the stories in SoA.

Trite, with none of the cool moodiness, or acopolyptic overtones that we get in most rpgs.

Heh, I stole your trick.

Originally posted by Yoshi
No one makes better RPGs than Konami - not Sega, not Square, not Enix, and sure as hell not GameArts.

Cool, this is fun.

Btw - how can anybody say there's no moodiness or apocalyptic overtones in Skies? I mean, Valua gets demolished, and the whole point of the game is to prevent the looming apocalypse brought about by the moody every-other-Final-Fantasy-goth-kid-villain main bad guy. Just because the ultra-shallow plastic main characters smile through the whole thing like dunces doesn't mean it isn't there.

Seriously though, neither was great. Skies had a great world, decent soundtrack and graphics...and that's it. If it were on playstation and made by anybody other than Sega, everyone here would ignore it. It's obvious Sega said "we need Final Fantasy for our system - make it!" And so Overworks went and shamefully stole plot point after plot point from the FF games.

Grandia II was pretty darn uninspired, and if there were a different name on the box it would hardly ever be brought up.

There is no great traditional rpg on the DC. Between the two Skies is the better game, but it doesn't really deserve to mentioned alongside the best of the PC Engine, SNES or PS/PS2.

[xS]

Originally posted by Ranji
The best console RPG's are the 16-bit Super Famicom/Mega Drive classics.

Are you reffering to ROMhacked RPG's? Becuase the RPG's that have been localized are pretty weak compared to whats left behind. Monster World 4, Seiken Denetsu 3, Star Ocean, Tales of Phantasia, etc,etc are teh 1337.
IMO RPG's should get better every era. Does Phantasy Star 2 have anything on Valkrie Profile?
Though this eras RPG's have been pretty dissapointing outside of Dynasty Tactics.

The most stagnant vg genre.

Becuase the only RPG that exist are Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest, and Phantasy Star?

Bully that, you can control them all if you're into that. You can stop time and switch characters, asign thier move and thier guage will determine when they cast it. Proficencey and speak speed have a LOT to do with you strategy and you can't beat the boss so easily without assigning your charater to to do one thing because the other would kill them. It's not like you're controling one guy and AI takes over. You can reasonably control them all. It's just that menial battles won't require you to because they're of little consequence (watch out for some disaster monsters though... petrify your whole party without you having time to react.. sucks).

Werd. And there's a shitload of stuff to do outside of the battles.

[ferricide]

Originally posted by Frogacuda
And yeah, it never ceases to amaze me how people can bash Grandia IIs story and praise Skies' story in the same breath.

grandia ii's story is like the bastard offspring of final fantasy viii and lunar 2. so effing boring.

skies has way better, more appealing characters. and its story is told with a lot of heart. sure, it's not original, but neither was grandia ii's. i found skies to be engaging on all levels (i definitely agree about the statement with the boss battles. the battle system in skies has a lot to it -- it's just slow.)

i also think that grandia ii's battle system is so boring. probably because it's so easy -- if you actually had to learn it and use it intelligently to succeed maybe it'd actually be compelling. grandia ii is a game i tried to finish THREE times and still have failed to and ultimately gave up. i think it's a good game, but it's nothing to rave about. it's a "the whole is less than the sum of its parts" deal. oh, and the dungeons are vilely boring.

Originally posted by StriderKyo
Seriously though, neither was great. Skies had a great world, decent soundtrack and graphics...and that's it. If it were on playstation and made by anybody other than Sega, everyone here would ignore it. It's obvious Sega said "we need Final Fantasy for our system - make it!" And so Overworks went and shamefully stole plot point after plot point from the FF games.

man, there is very little i hate more than statements like that. ooh, you figured us out. =P

you're missing one of the most crucial aspects of skies that probably was entirely lost on you -- it's that the people making the game really *felt* it. there's definitely a sense that they got behind the story and the game and that love and craft really comes through in the final product. maybe i'm being too warm 'n' fuzzy, but i get nothing but warm memories from my playing through skies. i've had to forcibly hold myself back from replaying the DC version while waiting for the GC version.

then again, i think FFX is the best game in *that* series, so i'm sure a whole can of worms will be opened by my even suggesting it. you can't please everyone all of the time ...

(moving on...)

Originally posted by Tsubaki
While I absolutely love the presentation of Valkyrie Profile, I actually find the battles extremely limited cuz once you find your combo, you pretty much do the same thing every battle until you get a new party member, or get a new weapon. Strange how everyone loves the VP battle system, but I think it's the only weak link in the game.

sure, there's a certain degree of repetition to them, but isn't that the case in any game with mechanics like that (many fighters, etc)? i certainly wasn't able to pull off everything perfectly every time -- and when i did, it was such a great feeling. plus, as you said, you'd get new characters. i find it very compelling -- it's a very visceral battle system. i actually put down the game after i beat lezard valeth's tower because i needed to cool down. but sadly i totally lost my rhythm when i was ready to pick the game up again and i wasn't able to excel at the battles anymore, so i've never really gone back to it. i still think it was one of the highlights of RPGs on playstation though.

[StriderKyo]

Originally posted by ferricide
man, there is very little i hate more than statements like that. ooh, you figured us out. =P

Hey, I can't speak for you personally man, but if you don't think the Sega thing comes into play around here, you haven't been on these boards enough.

you're missing one of the most crucial aspects of skies that probably was entirely lost on you -- it's that the people making the game really *felt* it. there's definitely a sense that they got behind the story and the game and that love and craft really comes through in the final product. maybe i'm being too warm 'n' fuzzy, but i get nothing but warm memories from my playing through skies. i've had to forcibly hold myself back from replaying the DC version while waiting for the GC version.

It wasn't lost on me, I just hate that stuff. It was like playing a bad saturday morning cartoon. The characters came off as so fake, so inhuman, I just couldn't connect with them. I mean, the whole script, when it wasn't stealing scenes directly from Final Fantasy, felt like this:

Vyse: "Hey, everyone in Valua was just murdered before our eyes. Well, that's a shame."

Fina: "I feel sad."

Aika: "Hey, sad's for wimps! Don't give up, believe in the power of happiness in your heart!"

Vyse: "Yeah!"

Fina: "Wow, you're right! Thanks for helping me through that troubling time, guys!"

Vyse: "Hey, birthdays are fun!"

Aika: "Yeah! Let's pretend it's somebody's birthday, and bake a birthday cake!"

Vyse: "High-five, everybody!"

Everybody: "Yaaayyyyy!!"

I mean, maybe that's your idea of a magical, moving experience. But the whole thing just felt juvenile and insulting to my intelligence after while.

But either way, that sort of thing's a judgement call. Some people like it, others won't. So I just stick to the stuff you can try to debate more objectively: originality, complexity of plot, depth of character, environment design, graphic detail, the battle system, etc. Skies is solid in many of those areas, but totally run-of-the-mill in others.

then again, i think FFX is the best game in *that* series, so i'm sure a whole can of worms will be opened by my even suggesting it. you can't please everyone all of the time ...

I haven't played FFX yet (I'll get to it after Xenosaga), but I've liked all the other FFs except for VIII.

[ferricide]

Originally posted by StriderKyo
I mean, maybe that's your idea of a magical, moving experience. But the whole thing just felt juvenile and insulting to my intelligence after while.

wow. and i usually think i'm pretty cynical. that was harsh. =)

but i definitely have a very open mind when it comes to narratives and characters, and i found SOA very charming. whereas the narrative in grandia ii and its characterizations seemed trite, forced, artificial, and very been-there-done-that. i really do feel like that game is, as i said, the bastard offspring of FFVIII and lunar 2, and i sure don't like lunar 2. =) (i do like FFVIII, but another game on its heels that seemed to do that same thing hardly seemed compelling.)

Originally posted by StriderKyo
But either way, that sort of thing's a judgement call. Some people like it, others won't. So I just stick to the stuff you can try to debate more objectively: originality, complexity of plot, depth of character, environment design, graphic detail, the battle system, etc. Skies is solid in many of those areas, but totally run-of-the-mill in others.

i don't consider skies run-of-the-mill in any area. seriously. ymmv -- it's not just about a list we can tick down and say "yes" or "no" to whether or not it excels in that area .. it even comes down to in what ways you think it's important to excel in that area. grandia 2 sure had sexy towns! why is the game so boring? =)

Originally posted by StriderKyo
I haven't played FFX yet (I'll get to it after Xenosaga), but I've liked all the other FFs except for VIII.

well, to be honest -- it most resembles 8, coming from the same team (in terms of the scenario and characterization, which were the strong points of VIII imo.) unlike 8 the story actually makes sense so there's something besides characterization to enjoy. and the gameplay rox, which is imo *very* unlike 8. =) FFX is the best game on the PS2 for someone of my tastes, and i consider skies to be very near it in terms of how much i like it -- to give you some idea of how much i like the both of them. i'm really looking forward to replaying skies and enjoying it once more, and figuring out where it fits with me. gotta replay X before X-2 comes out as well...