Blog Post: Off The RecordFollow

New FFXIV Blog Entry. Didnt see it on the forums yet so here is the link.. feel free to edit it :D

http://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/blog



Edited, Apr 9th 2013 12:43pm by Wint

I only played a couple of the ff games ffxi being my favorite. what was the viangaa from?

Tactics Advanced.

Play ittttttttttttttttttt.

emulator is your friend if you don't have the console.

hahaha, true that true!

That would be epic :O

Finally somebody else says it around here, Tactics Advance was a horrible title, Final Fantasy Tactics was a true gem, from story, music, theme and graphics it was all great, then here comes TA and it was just god awful.

I have always advocated that SE could have made a pre-quel about FFT set in the origins of the 50 year war and how balbanes and T.G Cid came into power. or just a flat out sequel :(

As standalone titles, Final Fantasy Tactics Advance and Final Fantasy Tactics Advance 2 are great portable tactical strategy titles (and their sprites are top-notch, at that). They are rather juvenile, though. Compared to one of the best games of all time -- not even just within its genre -- that is, to the original Final Fantasy Tactics, yes they're inferior.

Often times, when a sequel is still good, but not enough like the original, it evokes resentment from critics as they vent their disappointment or highlight what they see as wasted potential -- much more so than they would have if not for its namesake.

There are countless examples of this phenomenon, from Final Fantasy XII or XIII (depending upon who you ask), to Diablo III. Taken as nothing more than a Diablo-inspired hack-and-slash, Diablo III is a short, but okay game, sort of a B-minus; but as the successor to one of the most fondly remembered, darkly mystic, genre-defining titles of the last couple decades, well, it's a grrrroawl-foam-at-mouth-F-minus-minus... and so on.

In short: Final Fantasy Tactics Advance is not a mediocre title, realistically speaking it's one of the best GBA games around. It's mediocre next to Final Fantasy Tactics, yes, of course, just like nearly every other tactical strategy game ever made is mediocre to what's virtually the best. Nothing can really hold a candle to that game. Regardless of comparisons, though, calling the sequel (in this case) a "horrible title" is just plain hyperbolic.

No as somebody else stated, some people just have lower standards in gaming, Tactics advance and tactics advance 2, when compared to FFT are mediocre at best, and as stand alone titles which they are not, because nobody bought Tactics advance as a stand alone title, it was because of the epic status of FFT, they are mediocre at best also, Ogre Battle: Knight of Lodis is a far superior title than Tactics advance, and both titles are childs of Ogre Battle: Let us cling together, a title that is far superior to FFT, in fact sakaguchi brought Yazmat onboard Squaresoft, because of that title, he wanted a Ogre Battle Tactics set in the FF universe hence "FFT" a water down version of Let us cling together.

Also Diablo III was not Diablo II, because it really was nothing akin to Diablo II, it was a softcore game with diablo lore and prettier graphics (A theme we are all too familiar with nowdays in gaming) aslo titles better than FFTA ? Suikoden Tactics, Super Robot Wars Original Generation 1-2, Fire Emblem, Knights of Lodis, Vanguard bandits, Advance wars 1-2 etc etc.

Now are they fun ? Sure! Are they up to any of those titles ? Not even close, FFTA suffers from the "Lets do it bigger because stuff" you got 979797 items that offer 798794646 abilities, and only a few are even worth your time.

Also Play Eternal Eyes, i never played it, and did not even knew it existed until recently, awesome game. Also check Arc the lad 1-2-3 Awesome story if you follow the 3 games.

I must say, i first played FFTA and then FFT so there are people that first played those. The game was not half bad for me, period. It may not be up to par with FFT but that doesn't mean it was "sh*t" . There is a good reason we compare "sequels" to their previous games yes but if someone played it without knowing FFT existed they would like it.

I saw the same happening with Fallout 3 i hated that game cause it had nothing to do with the previous ones. All the rest that never played the previous? Loved it. Because it wasn't up to par with the previous fallouts didn't make it bad, it made it bad only in the eyes of people that knew a little bit of fallout games.

Edited, Apr 11th 2013 10:21am by Teravibe

I like you better when you're making the same joke for the twentieth time.

I think Ogre battle is better balanced than the FFT games but imo not better than the original FFT. Square took the ogre series somewhat, simplified it but it made it more dynamic in presentation.

The problem with SE as of late is they think bigger and better is always best. To some degree that may be true. But not if you lose the core of what gamers loved most about an entry. I feel that no matter how FFXIII-3 turns out, even if that were good. Because it strays so far from what fans of the franchise expect. It will be received with mixed criticism. They need less subtraction and more additions or expansions on features.