Games I wanted to love, but didn't
PostPosted:Fri Mar 26, 2021 5:53 pm
This will be mostly chronological in order.
1. Super Mario 64 and Odyssey (Switch) - These ones are kind of weird for me because I love games like Banjo Kazooie and Super Mario Galaxy, to this day I enjoy playing them. What does SMG do differently? 1. More interesting levels, the exploration feels meaningful and part of the narrative, and it seems there's always something I want to look for. With Mario 64 and Odyssey, I often felt directionless, a lack of inspiration to explore.
I've heard it's because these games are "open world" or a "sandbox game"- the thing is they're not. When I think of a sandbox game, I think of a game with open world elements, but you can literally just stick to a small part of the world and have a meaningful gameplay experience: Crusader Kings, Minecraft, SimCity, Dwarf Fortress, etc... With open world I expect a non-linear experience either without an ending or the ending just being something you can do (Breath of the Wild, Witcher 3, Xenoblade Chronicles X, Dragon Quest 9 post-game, etc...). Super Mario 64 and Odyssey (especially Odyssey) are incredibly linear, and feel more linear than Galaxy 1. The levels are closed off and while you can do things out of order, they're designed with a specific direction to follow. They're basically the same as every 3D platformer not using the Crash Bandicoot formula. Lastly, none of the sandbox or open world games I listed above have the issues in Odyssey and 64.
This is just my opinion that the games aren't very interesting, they're extremely popular.
2. Final Fantasy 9 - This game had the graphical style and many elements I wanted to see in an RPG. It somehow felt very flat to me. But replaying it a few years back, and then the other FF games, I see kind of clearly why I disliked the game.
Characters are shallow and uninteresting. While Vivi has a somewhat interesting Sci-fi-ish story, it seems just like a simplified version of the Cloud and Sephiroth stories and lacking the emotional and psychological depth, or detailed account. I considered it might be that the cast is very shallow and extroverted, a change from FF4 to 8, but FFX has extroverted characters too, and they're interesting.
Pacing is a big issue, the story is heavy in the beginning 6-8 hours and the last 2-3 hours, but the middle is mostly just running through uninteresting scenarios, empty locations, giant repetitious trees, and more. It is a big change from FF4, 6, 7, and 8 where (at least IMO) there was always a lot of interesting stuff going on in the story at every single step. FF7 does have a lull period in the late game, but that's about it for all 4 of these games. FF9 has lull periods that are bigger than FF7s, and they're throughout the whole game.
3. Metroid Prime - this is another game franchise I don't get. It's got incredibly high reviews, and in theory I should like it given I like exploring around. But the last time I tried to play the flaws and reasons I disliked it were more obvious. In short, I dislike dungeon crawlers and slow paced FPS games - Metroid Prime is both.
Initially, I thought it was just the Gamecube controller, controls for games like Metroid Prime and RE4 are clunky and frustrating. The Wii remote setup is a giant improvement for each, but the difference is Wii RE4 is tons of fun, but Metroid Prime is still annoying. It is not just the controls, but the scanning visor is intrusive and feels kind of meaningless. Each time you scan something, you have to flip out the visor, and let the scan load, and then read what message comes up - sometimes it's interesting, but 9 times out of 10 it's something you've read before, or something that feels less inspired than a mobile game's flavour text.
The thing is if you don't scan everything, there's a high chance you'll miss something important, such as, the only way to proceed forward in the game. If you get stuck in this game, it's a needle in a haystack going around and figuring out what it is you missed doing.
Third, I felt that the game didn't have very interesting things to do. There was some stuff that felt like a pinball game when using the Samus-ball (or whatever), and that was kind of interesting. But the game feels desolate and empty compared to the 2D counter-parts; and the 2D counter-parts, seem to have more interesting areas, despite being more repetitive in level design; and Metroid 2 being monochrome.
4. Bravely Default and Project Octopath Traveler - I think it was in these two games I recognized elements that I really didn't like in RPGs - complicating the battle system for complexity's sake. It doesn't make the game more interesting to me, in fact, after I master the battle system in the first 20-40 minutes, it more or less feels like extra stuff to do to achieve the same thing as just hitting "Attack" from a menu. And those games with "Attack" and "Skill" and "Magic" tend to have more complex tactics to take down the enemy, while the games with the complex battle systems are pretty much the same order of operations each time. Xenoblade Chronicles 2 had this issue with its combo system as well, but the game had a lot more going on for it than its battle system.
Sure, this sort of battle system looks interesting, but when you do it hundreds and hundreds of times you just want to GET ON WITH IT! And the game becomes more about how to most simplistically destroy enemies rather than trying to master the battle system.
Xenogears was the first game to stack battle points, but it was optional - and resulted in fairly cool looking moves - but IMO, the weakest part of Xenogears gameplay (besides the Tower of Babel jumping). Bravely Default basically forces you into doing it, and menu selecting 3 attacks from each character.
Chrono Trigger is the ultimate simplistic execution with complex results battle system.
Also, Bravely Default repeats like 4 times to pad. Some of the stuff about how the world changes is interesting, but otherwise it's dumb. Chrono Trigger does this too, but it's New Game +, and feels MUCH better. Imagine playing Chrono Trigger, but you couldn't get to an ending act against Lavos until playing through a forced New Game+ 4 times? Also, Bravely Default is NO Chrono Trigger in terms of the environments.
5. Child of Light - this game is beautiful but, much like the above, too complex for what it is. Basically a platformer with RPG battle mechanics lumped in. Super Paper Mario does something similar, but is FAR more fluid and is actually a lot of fun - IMO, the most underrated of the Paper Mario games.
1. Super Mario 64 and Odyssey (Switch) - These ones are kind of weird for me because I love games like Banjo Kazooie and Super Mario Galaxy, to this day I enjoy playing them. What does SMG do differently? 1. More interesting levels, the exploration feels meaningful and part of the narrative, and it seems there's always something I want to look for. With Mario 64 and Odyssey, I often felt directionless, a lack of inspiration to explore.
I've heard it's because these games are "open world" or a "sandbox game"- the thing is they're not. When I think of a sandbox game, I think of a game with open world elements, but you can literally just stick to a small part of the world and have a meaningful gameplay experience: Crusader Kings, Minecraft, SimCity, Dwarf Fortress, etc... With open world I expect a non-linear experience either without an ending or the ending just being something you can do (Breath of the Wild, Witcher 3, Xenoblade Chronicles X, Dragon Quest 9 post-game, etc...). Super Mario 64 and Odyssey (especially Odyssey) are incredibly linear, and feel more linear than Galaxy 1. The levels are closed off and while you can do things out of order, they're designed with a specific direction to follow. They're basically the same as every 3D platformer not using the Crash Bandicoot formula. Lastly, none of the sandbox or open world games I listed above have the issues in Odyssey and 64.
This is just my opinion that the games aren't very interesting, they're extremely popular.
2. Final Fantasy 9 - This game had the graphical style and many elements I wanted to see in an RPG. It somehow felt very flat to me. But replaying it a few years back, and then the other FF games, I see kind of clearly why I disliked the game.
Characters are shallow and uninteresting. While Vivi has a somewhat interesting Sci-fi-ish story, it seems just like a simplified version of the Cloud and Sephiroth stories and lacking the emotional and psychological depth, or detailed account. I considered it might be that the cast is very shallow and extroverted, a change from FF4 to 8, but FFX has extroverted characters too, and they're interesting.
Pacing is a big issue, the story is heavy in the beginning 6-8 hours and the last 2-3 hours, but the middle is mostly just running through uninteresting scenarios, empty locations, giant repetitious trees, and more. It is a big change from FF4, 6, 7, and 8 where (at least IMO) there was always a lot of interesting stuff going on in the story at every single step. FF7 does have a lull period in the late game, but that's about it for all 4 of these games. FF9 has lull periods that are bigger than FF7s, and they're throughout the whole game.
3. Metroid Prime - this is another game franchise I don't get. It's got incredibly high reviews, and in theory I should like it given I like exploring around. But the last time I tried to play the flaws and reasons I disliked it were more obvious. In short, I dislike dungeon crawlers and slow paced FPS games - Metroid Prime is both.
Initially, I thought it was just the Gamecube controller, controls for games like Metroid Prime and RE4 are clunky and frustrating. The Wii remote setup is a giant improvement for each, but the difference is Wii RE4 is tons of fun, but Metroid Prime is still annoying. It is not just the controls, but the scanning visor is intrusive and feels kind of meaningless. Each time you scan something, you have to flip out the visor, and let the scan load, and then read what message comes up - sometimes it's interesting, but 9 times out of 10 it's something you've read before, or something that feels less inspired than a mobile game's flavour text.
The thing is if you don't scan everything, there's a high chance you'll miss something important, such as, the only way to proceed forward in the game. If you get stuck in this game, it's a needle in a haystack going around and figuring out what it is you missed doing.
Third, I felt that the game didn't have very interesting things to do. There was some stuff that felt like a pinball game when using the Samus-ball (or whatever), and that was kind of interesting. But the game feels desolate and empty compared to the 2D counter-parts; and the 2D counter-parts, seem to have more interesting areas, despite being more repetitive in level design; and Metroid 2 being monochrome.
4. Bravely Default and Project Octopath Traveler - I think it was in these two games I recognized elements that I really didn't like in RPGs - complicating the battle system for complexity's sake. It doesn't make the game more interesting to me, in fact, after I master the battle system in the first 20-40 minutes, it more or less feels like extra stuff to do to achieve the same thing as just hitting "Attack" from a menu. And those games with "Attack" and "Skill" and "Magic" tend to have more complex tactics to take down the enemy, while the games with the complex battle systems are pretty much the same order of operations each time. Xenoblade Chronicles 2 had this issue with its combo system as well, but the game had a lot more going on for it than its battle system.
Sure, this sort of battle system looks interesting, but when you do it hundreds and hundreds of times you just want to GET ON WITH IT! And the game becomes more about how to most simplistically destroy enemies rather than trying to master the battle system.
Xenogears was the first game to stack battle points, but it was optional - and resulted in fairly cool looking moves - but IMO, the weakest part of Xenogears gameplay (besides the Tower of Babel jumping). Bravely Default basically forces you into doing it, and menu selecting 3 attacks from each character.
Chrono Trigger is the ultimate simplistic execution with complex results battle system.
Also, Bravely Default repeats like 4 times to pad. Some of the stuff about how the world changes is interesting, but otherwise it's dumb. Chrono Trigger does this too, but it's New Game +, and feels MUCH better. Imagine playing Chrono Trigger, but you couldn't get to an ending act against Lavos until playing through a forced New Game+ 4 times? Also, Bravely Default is NO Chrono Trigger in terms of the environments.
5. Child of Light - this game is beautiful but, much like the above, too complex for what it is. Basically a platformer with RPG battle mechanics lumped in. Super Paper Mario does something similar, but is FAR more fluid and is actually a lot of fun - IMO, the most underrated of the Paper Mario games.
