<div style='font: 10pt Tahoma; text-align: left; '>The new Kingdom Hearts is a dumb GBA game? Disappointing.</div>
Your place for discussion about RPGs, gaming, music, movies, anime, computers, sports, and any other stuff we care to talk about...
The new Kingdom Hearts is a dumb GBA game? Disappointing.
- Because playing them is not enough, we have to bitch about them daily, too. We had a Gameplay forum, but it got replaced by GameFAQs.
<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>Well, it's the sequel to a dumb PS2 game, what do you expect?</div>
-Insert Inspiring Quote-
<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '>I'd rate it as above average, though it had its moments.</div>
"For one thing to live, another thing must be killed. God, or whoever is responsible, deserves respect for creating such a system. It reveals that we cannot take all matters into our own hands. We need only to focus on doing our best--a simple, yet profound way to live, is it not?"
<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>I didn't say I hated it, but I don't think that there's anything spectacular about it; if that game is spectacular, then what do you call the 388 games that are better than it (according to Gamerankings)? =)</div>
-Insert Inspiring Quote-
<div style='font: 11pt arial; text-align: left; '>I swear to God...if you try to use any set of "rankings" as an objective quality scale ever again - even in jest - I will find and destroy you.</div>
[b]Sorry, it looks like I'm going to have to kill you in an instant.[/b]
<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>1) Who do you think is more accurate? Some angry person on the Internet who calls a game like Kingdom Hearts Spectacular or review sites? Both might be grossly innacurate, but which has the higher chance of being accurate? 2) I'll look forward to you trying to "destroy" me. =/</div>
-Insert Inspiring Quote-
<div style='font: 11pt arial; text-align: left; '>Here's a new idea! How about instead of using either of those we actually propose arguments and provide rational support for them! What a novel idea!</div>
[b]Sorry, it looks like I'm going to have to kill you in an instant.[/b]
<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>For example, people who care about graphics a great deal are clearly going to like Final Fantasy 10 over Final Fantasy 1. Objectively speaking, there is no way possible to show that Final Fantasy 1 has better graphics than Final Fantasy 10, it would be foolish to argue otherwise.</div>
-Insert Inspiring Quote-
<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '>How many fucking years has it been that we've had this argument with Seeker? Just ignore it, folks.</div>
"For one thing to live, another thing must be killed. God, or whoever is responsible, deserves respect for creating such a system. It reveals that we cannot take all matters into our own hands. We need only to focus on doing our best--a simple, yet profound way to live, is it not?"
<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>Let's see. It essentially has the same gameplay as just about any other lowsy 3D platformer I've played except it has leveling up and no right analog camera control. Contemporaries to that game in the platform genre include Ratchet and Clank, Maximo, Mario Sunshine, and Jak and Daxter (among others) all of which were more fun and polished in terms of gameplay than Kingdom Hearts. The storyline was flat and uninteresting. The only thing going for it were some very pretty aesthetics and whoring of Disney and Final Fantasy characters. The areas were small and repetitive forcing you to go through the same areas over and over and over again until you set off the right cut-scenes. Sora's jump detection is absolute crap and the camera control is horrendously bad. If you think this game is spectacular, likely you haven't seen the greatness of other games in the platform genre and therefore don't know what you're missing.
Of course there is a degree of subjectivity involved, but the degree is not high enough to form arguable points which counter the ones provided here.</div>
Of course there is a degree of subjectivity involved, but the degree is not high enough to form arguable points which counter the ones provided here.</div>
-Insert Inspiring Quote-
<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>Woops, this sounds a 'bit' too aggressive in tone, please don't take it that way =P</div>
-Insert Inspiring Quote-
<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>I don't think I'm the only one around here who didn't like the game. The statement of "It was a spectacular" implies that this is the general consensus; which I showed by linking to Gamerankings that it is not.</div>
-Insert Inspiring Quote-
<div style='font: 11pt arial; text-align: left; '>Why don't you find another 3-D Action RPG whose gameplay compares to KH? I really don't think one has even been created. You can't compare it to games like Jak and R&C because they're an entirely different genre. Anyway, I'll agree that the camera was pretty shoddy at times, but the battle system itself was extremely innovative and fun. They maintained all the RPG aspects (spells, items, party memebrs) while integrating them into real-time - which was an immensely difficult task. Donald and Goofy were always useful as support characters and you could actually count on them to heal you when you needed it. I never had a problem with the jumping (except when you're trying to jump onto those barrels in the one part, but who really cares about that?), and the flight technique was awesome. The difficulty was superb, and all the bosses were complex and forced you to develop a strategy instead of just smashing them until they died. The magic/item system got a little muddled occasionally, but that really only meant you had to be prepared for every battle instead of just charging in and it added to the intensity during big fights (and the limit on the amount of healing items you could carry in battle was very smart). Plus you had plenty of other really cool challenges left after you beat the game (the battle with Sephiroth being but one).
As for the story, I found it surprisingly dark and intricate for such a seemingly stupid merging of the Disney and Squaresoft universes. You lose your girlfriend and your best friend becomes your arch nemesis - pretty heavy stuff for such a light-hearted game. And the cameos were all fucking awesome - I don't see how you can justify calling it "whoring." Even Mickey was a badass, and that's not an easy task to accomplish.
Anyway, even talking in terms of your "ranking systems", I doubt you'll find a single review in any reputable gaming mag that gave it under 8/10 or 4/5 stars - and these are guys who actually <I>play</i> games, not some thirteen year old who once watched his friend play part of Vice City and then found the GameRankings website. Besides, they're making <I>two</i> sequels for it, that means that it <I>has</i> to be a good game, right? Or are you the only one who gets to decide what stats makes a game objectively good? :)</div>
As for the story, I found it surprisingly dark and intricate for such a seemingly stupid merging of the Disney and Squaresoft universes. You lose your girlfriend and your best friend becomes your arch nemesis - pretty heavy stuff for such a light-hearted game. And the cameos were all fucking awesome - I don't see how you can justify calling it "whoring." Even Mickey was a badass, and that's not an easy task to accomplish.
Anyway, even talking in terms of your "ranking systems", I doubt you'll find a single review in any reputable gaming mag that gave it under 8/10 or 4/5 stars - and these are guys who actually <I>play</i> games, not some thirteen year old who once watched his friend play part of Vice City and then found the GameRankings website. Besides, they're making <I>two</i> sequels for it, that means that it <I>has</i> to be a good game, right? Or are you the only one who gets to decide what stats makes a game objectively good? :)</div>
[b]Sorry, it looks like I'm going to have to kill you in an instant.[/b]
<div style='font: 11pt arial; text-align: left; '>Honestly, I thought my post implied the exact opposite. "it was a spectacular game - and I don't even like Disney." What would my not liking Disney have to do with the game's "spectacularness" on a level of general consensus?</div>
[b]Sorry, it looks like I'm going to have to kill you in an instant.[/b]
<div style='font: 11pt arial; text-align: left; '>I'm just a minor player caught up in the intricate game of intrigue, deceit, power, sex, and drugs, that is the Shrine's dubious underworld</div>
[b]Sorry, it looks like I'm going to have to kill you in an instant.[/b]
<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '>Spectacular? NOt a chance. It had a really cool premise and storyline, which were enough to make you want to keep playing it, even though the fighting became quite tedious</div>
I was there on that fateful day, were you?
<div style='font: 10pt "EngraversGothic BT", "Copperplate Gothic Light", "Century Gothic"; text-align: left; '>Not really. I didn't like it either. Shellie bought it for herself, and when I was playing it, it was decent, but I just couldn't shake the feeling that I had Goofy and Donald Duck on my team.</div>
Rosalina: But you didn't.
Robert: But I DON'T.
Rosalina: You sure that's right?
Robert: I was going to HAVE told you they'd come?
Rosalina: No.
Robert: The subjunctive?
Rosalina: That's not the subjunctive.
Robert: I don't think the syntax has been invented yet.
Rosalina: It would have had to have had been.
Robert: Had to have...had...been? That can't be right.
Robert: But I DON'T.
Rosalina: You sure that's right?
Robert: I was going to HAVE told you they'd come?
Rosalina: No.
Robert: The subjunctive?
Rosalina: That's not the subjunctive.
Robert: I don't think the syntax has been invented yet.
Rosalina: It would have had to have had been.
Robert: Had to have...had...been? That can't be right.
<div style='font: 10pt Tahoma; text-align: left; '>One of my biggest pet peeves. It is "Couldnt care less." If you "Could care less" then your level of caring is not at the lowest it can be, thus you care a little. If you "Couldnt care less." then this is the least amount of caring possible, which is what people mean when they try and say it.</div>
<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>I think you'll find the game has MUCH more in common with 3D platformers than RPG's and 3D Action RPG's like Tales of Symphonia.</div>
-Insert Inspiring Quote-
<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '>It's kinda like FPSs and why you can't call Metroid an FPS. When you say "3D Platformer" (or "FPS") you're implying a very specific type of game (ie. like Mario 64 or Crash), so you have to separate it a little or people get confused</div>
I was there on that fateful day, were you?
<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>There's not even a jump feature in Zelda.</div>
-Insert Inspiring Quote-
<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>Metroid is a First Person Shooter.</div>
-Insert Inspiring Quote-
<div style='font: 11pt arial; text-align: left; '>The games in the Tales series play exactly like "classic" RPGs - they just combine classic RPG elements with a real-time battle system (and even then it's still linear).
And looking at the actual design features of KH you'll see it actually has a lot more of an RPG feel to it than a Platformer. How many places in KH do you have to worry about falling to your death by not properly executing a jump? None. How many times in Ratchet & Clank did you have to go back and level-up before beating a boss? None. The levels in KH are 3-D and require some Platformer-esque skill in navigating them, but the concentration is not on intense acrobatics sessions but on RPG-like exploration and character improvement. Battles, too, are generally "staged" in classic-RPG fashion rather than enemies being distributed evenly throughout the level maps in Platformer-style; as well, you're generally not expected to die very often, like an RPG, and the primary difficulty while moving through the levels (as opposed to bosses) comes largely from how well you manage your items, equipment, and techniques rather than your reflexes and manual dexterity (though KH, like all A-RPGs, includes a balance of both). Besides the jumping and the freedom of movement, KH actually has a lot more in common with classic-RPGs than I think you care to realize.</div>
And looking at the actual design features of KH you'll see it actually has a lot more of an RPG feel to it than a Platformer. How many places in KH do you have to worry about falling to your death by not properly executing a jump? None. How many times in Ratchet & Clank did you have to go back and level-up before beating a boss? None. The levels in KH are 3-D and require some Platformer-esque skill in navigating them, but the concentration is not on intense acrobatics sessions but on RPG-like exploration and character improvement. Battles, too, are generally "staged" in classic-RPG fashion rather than enemies being distributed evenly throughout the level maps in Platformer-style; as well, you're generally not expected to die very often, like an RPG, and the primary difficulty while moving through the levels (as opposed to bosses) comes largely from how well you manage your items, equipment, and techniques rather than your reflexes and manual dexterity (though KH, like all A-RPGs, includes a balance of both). Besides the jumping and the freedom of movement, KH actually has a lot more in common with classic-RPGs than I think you care to realize.</div>
[b]Sorry, it looks like I'm going to have to kill you in an instant.[/b]
<div style='font: 11pt arial; text-align: left; '>I should add, though, that, as time goes on, the lines between "RPG" and "Platformer" have and will become more blurred over time.</div>
[b]Sorry, it looks like I'm going to have to kill you in an instant.[/b]
<div style='font: 10pt verdana; text-align: left; padding: 0% 10% 0% 10%; '><b>Link:</b> <a href="http://www.penny-arcade.com/view.php3?d ... 1&res=l</a>
This is more of a mid to late eighties platformer, with... Yes, I believe there's a hint of sim."</div>
This is more of a mid to late eighties platformer, with... Yes, I believe there's a hint of sim."</div>
<div style='font: 10pt verdana; text-align: left; padding: 0% 10% 0% 10%; '>I know, I kid, I kid. However, at a certain point, I do think long discussions about how to classify a game is silly. We all might have different definitions of the genres, and different ways of grouping games into those genres. They're all legitamite, and in the end, makes no difference.</div>
<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>If they intended Kingdom Hearts to be an RPG and compared to RPG's, then it would have passive gameplay and be turn based. Overall, the game does not add up to be a very good. The only reason people would like it is because of the character appearances; once that novelty wears off, what are you left with?</div>
-Insert Inspiring Quote-