FF13 Bosses Respond to Western Review Scores

[Skullmaster123]

With this I'm done buying Square-Enix's games. They're not even trying anymore. Go play Mass Effect or Dragon Age you moron. I think most people would agree with me when I say that most would rather play a game that gives you both freedom and a compelling story, not FF13 "genius" game design made up of unchanged linearity.

Compelling story my ass. Origins and most other WRPGs are nothing more than interactive LoTR parodies.

 

[SendMeNoodz84]

With this I'm done buying Square-Enix's games. They're not even trying anymore. Go play Mass Effect or Dragon Age you moron. I think most people would agree with me when I say that most would rather play a game that gives you both freedom and a compelling story, not FF13 "genius" game design made up of unchanged linearity.

Compelling story my ass. Origins and most other WRPGs are nothing more than interactive LoTR parodies.

Well, getting opinion out of the way here, I wasn't only talking about the fantasy RPG's. What about the Sci-Fi WRPG's such as Mass Effect and KotOR? Both critically acclaimed for having THE most compelling story lines out there.

 

[SyphonX]

Personally, I can't fathom why people would be concerned about Final Fantasy being linear. I would have thought people would be concerned if it wasn't linear, i.e. Final Fantasy XII, an entry into the series which wasn't exactly "well received".

The day that I don't have the option to sit down and play a straight-forward RPG with a Point A -to- Point B structure, is the day that I get sad about gaming. The open world and linear genres can easily coexist amongst one another, they are not mutually exclusive.

Final Fantasy XIII will sell millions, and I mean f-ing millions. Asia is going to eat it up, and a large portion of the west is going to chew it up and swallow it. The 360 is going to see basically it's first ever "Traditional RPG" even worth a damn, and the Playstation crowd will buy the game by default. I'm not saying this out of fanboyism for the FF series, as I've never even completed a Final Fantasy game. I look at this series with *profound* respect, because it has done so fucking much for the game industry. It's a game series that I don't necessarily play, but I will always absolutely love and respect it's existence.

Let Bethesda handle open world brilliance and let Bioware work it's magic until the end of time. Leave Square to what it does best, and respect them for everything they've done for this amazing industry. In 1997 they released Final Fantasy VII to the masses, and many people had cried for the first time in history over a video game.

So just play your open-world games, and shut your damn mouths.. is basically the summary of this rant.

 

[shadow skill]

Still not getting how linear is bad.

In story writing it's actually the only thing that works, and there has been no other kind in games that actually have a story. Multi-linear perhaps, but definitely not nonlinear.
Just because it's a game doesn't mean it absolutely has to have a choice system a la Bioware to tell a good story. Every other medium is capable of telling great stories without constant interaction... In truth we'd all be sick of it if every single game used the gimmick.

As for level design, it depends on the game. I don't see anyone complaining that Mass Effect had tunnel-runner maps, though in some games they are genuinely annoying.

Me the fact that the maps are the same box after box bullshit that they were in the first game is really annoying.

With this I'm done buying Square-Enix's games. They're not even trying anymore. Go play Mass Effect or Dragon Age you moron. I think most people would agree with me when I say that most would rather play a game that gives you both freedom and a compelling story, not FF13 "genius" game design made up of unchanged linearity.

Compelling story my ass. Origins and most other WRPGs are nothing more than interactive LoTR parodies.

Except they really are not that compelling at all, Dragon age is particularly boring because it is a setting we have seen even more than the setting for Mass Effect. Mass Effect's story is kind of hum drum because Bioware doesn't seem to know how to make an interesting antagonist (The Reapers have been laughably bad at this.) but they make up for that by making the characters fairly interesting. Assasin's Creed 2 has better writing, not to mention a more interesting setting than both Mass Effect and Dragon age.

 

[Axeli]

Still not getting how linear is bad.

In story writing it's actually the only thing that works, and there has been no other kind in games that actually have a story. Multi-linear perhaps, but definitely not nonlinear.
Just because it's a game doesn't mean it absolutely has to have a choice system a la Bioware to tell a good story. Every other medium is capable of telling great stories without constant interaction... In truth we'd all be sick of it if every single game used the gimmick.

As for level design, it depends on the game. I don't see anyone complaining that Mass Effect had tunnel-runner maps, though in some games they are genuinely annoying.

Me the fact that the maps are the same box after box bullshit that they were in the first game is really annoying

Meant to say Mass Effect 2 actually, but yes, the side quests in ME1 were hardly worth doing because of that.

 

[chozo_hybrid]

People need to stop hating linearity so much. It's a design choice, not a design flaw: what's with this ethnocentrism?

I see what he's saying: the more control you give the player, the less control you have as the designer. It makes telling a compelling story difficult. It's possible, but difficult. They want to tell us their story, and they are taking steps to ensure it. Linearity is not a bad thing, people. Final Fantasy has always told good stories, but in a different way than we do over here in the west: there is nothing wrong with that.

Yes but you would think now and then the series would evolve by more then just the graphics, linearity isn't the problem so much as having no choice about anything, they could throw the odd option at you now and then.

See though, the Final Fantasy series does change. Maybe it couldn't be seen as "evolution," but it changes. No Final Fantasy game can really be called the same. Even for a while, when the battle systems all followed the Active-Time formula, things worked differently. With "evolution," as we call it, a series adds new things and adjusts old ones with each entry, kind of stacking these changes up as the series goes along. Final Fantasy simply changes, delivering a completely different game each time. The battle system is never the same, the story is always different (and almost always really good), the characters are usually well-developed, the world and atmosphere changes from game to game... Final Fantasy may not evolve as most games do, but to say the series never changes is just not true.

As for choices, I still see nothing wrong with a lack of them. Control over the actual events of the story is not the only way to take advantage of gaming's unique interactive capabilities. Take Final Fantasy VII, for instance, when Cloud was being controlled, driven to kill Aerith. The player tries to press buttons to lead Cloud away, to lower his sword, but each button that is pressed only makes him raise the sword higher. Or Bioshock, how even though the player has full control of his character at all times, the one point where you really, really want it, you're deprived of it. These did not allow one to actually change the story, but they made for moments that were much more effective due to interactivity. Final Fantasy deals in these, delivering set stories with moments of interactivity to drive certain points home. And there's nothing wrong with that.

The battle system is basically the same it has been since FFVII, if not before then, adding in QTEs and the odd new battle command doesn't really make it a new system.

I never said the stories weren't great, they're okay but a little choice cannot hurt the franchise. It would just be nice to see a company that claims it pushes the envelope in the JRPG genre to take a new step instead of just "updating" the game with tweak between each one.

I respectfully disagree about the battle systems being the same. Sure, at their core, they're all turn-based battle systems, but those kinds of systems have never been about the actual systems, but rather about the customization surrounding them. The Materia system from FFVII, for instance, is nothing like the Licenses or Gambits from XII, or the drawing from VIII, or the sphere grid from X, or the simple "learn new spells at certain levels" system of older RPGs. Most of the battle systems may not have differences at a fundamental, battle-to-battle level, but turn-based battles are about customization outside of battle and strategic use of your setup in battle. And Final Fantasy changes that up completely from game to game.

The battle systems are, I said nothing about the levelling up and equiping etc, the way a battle is played works the same. Turn based battles in Final Fantasy aren't all about how you strategize and equip your characters when there's not much difficulty in the games. I am going to be honest, and this may be just me, but I can't remember the last time I got a game over in those games (Secret powerful bosses aside.) and that alone tells me the battle system needs a bit of work.

As for the story stuff, the story be straigh forward, but what I mean by choice that it could have a few objectives in the game you could get to choose which you do first is all.

From what I hear you heal after every battle in the game, where's the improvement there? That makes the game less challenging and less you have to do, taking things out like that aren't a way to improve the game.

 

[tkioz]

Of course we're looking at it from a western prospective... we live there duh. As for the story thing, Bioware and Bethesda manage just fine, making some of the most compelling stories around, choices have more impact because you're invested in the characters, in FF games you don't get choices.

 

[ItsAPaul]

Linear is good since only a few sandbox games are good and even then their main quest only goes on for 10 hours or so (maybe less in Fallout 3). Also Dragon Age is VERY linear, so I dunno what the contrast is supposed to be there.

FF13 is probably amazing, but the jrpg haters gotta hate. God forbid a final fantasy be like another final fantasy.

 

[shadow skill]

Maybe we should tell them to go play a Persona game, because Atlus has already murdered them in the story department a thousand times over.

Still not getting how linear is bad.

In story writing it's actually the only thing that works, and there has been no other kind in games that actually have a story. Multi-linear perhaps, but definitely not nonlinear.
Just because it's a game doesn't mean it absolutely has to have a choice system a la Bioware to tell a good story. Every other medium is capable of telling great stories without constant interaction... In truth we'd all be sick of it if every single game used the gimmick.

As for level design, it depends on the game. I don't see anyone complaining that Mass Effect had tunnel-runner maps, though in some games they are genuinely annoying.

Me the fact that the maps are the same box after box bullshit that they were in the first game is really annoying

Meant to say Mass Effect 2 actually, but yes, the side quests in ME1 were hardly worth doing because of that.

Don't remind me. I was very disappointed when I found that they did not address the map issue which is one of the major complaints people had with the first game.

 

[SyphonX]

Yeah, Dragon Age and Mass Effect are both pretty linear as far as the main story goes. Everyone knows this, it's not a secret, it's not a "grand illusion" (lol?). People understand rather well that they don't change the grand scope much, but they can drastically change personal outcomes with characters and other relationships.

(No Spoilers) Mass Effect 2 does have some rather plot-breaking decisions embedded in it. It's a trilogy, from start to finish. Mass Effect 2 is not a pile-on money grab, they wanted to make a trilogy from the start. All your decisions matter to an extent all the way into the trilogy. Who lives, who dies, what moral choices you made, all are going to come to (major) fruition in the third installment. Anyone who has completed Mass Effect 2 has already pondered some of their final decisions, because it's glaringly obvious that your choices could be a huge mistake.

(Minor Spoiler)

Not to mention, Shepard can die in Mass Effect 2. It shows it right on the loading screen quotes, and it's true... "Keep your save files and export them to Mass Effect 3.... if you survive."

 

[Programmed_For_Damage]

It's a Final Fantasy game, you pretty much know what you're going to get. You either like it or you don't.
Over the years my brother, who loves the series, has leant me FFVII, FFVIII, FFX and FFXII and I've found each of them underwhelming and couldn't connect with the characters. It's personal taste thing, not a western thing.

 

[Doug]

Of course we're looking at it from a western prospective... we live there duh. As for the story thing, Bioware and Bethesda manage just fine, making some of the most compelling stories around, choices have more impact because you're invested in the characters, in FF games you don't get choices.

Agreed. And its not the linearity thing that bugs me about this article - its the whole "Oh you would say that, YOUR WESTERNERS" thing that does.

 

[fahbrock]

I think most people play the FF series for the story telling. Game play hasn't changed much with the games. Sure, there are changes in the battle systems and leveling systems through out the games, but when you get down to it, it's still just random encounter to random encounter while you level your guy so you can go take on the next plot point.

What I'm trying to say is that this is a game series that has always been linear for the story telling aspect and I see no need for that to change.

 

[tkioz]

Of course we're looking at it from a western prospective... we live there duh. As for the story thing, Bioware and Bethesda manage just fine, making some of the most compelling stories around, choices have more impact because you're invested in the characters, in FF games you don't get choices.

Agreed. And its not the linearity thing that bugs me about this article - its the whole "Oh you would say that, YOUR WESTERNERS" thing that does.

Japan has always been kind of racist, but hardly ever gets called on it.

 

[ShadowKirby]

oops, "double"-post (as in, already posted that but my comp crashed).

 

[Dreyfuss]

They're right that open-endedness harms the quality of the main plot because with open-endedness comes not only the destruction of canon (since no one can say what the "true" series of events is), but the additional workload on the author to write for every possibility, and the need to structure events in such a way that they can happen in several chronological orders, which makes transitions awkward and sudden.

Players don't need any assistance creating their own stories. In fact the best player-created stories come from games that have no plot whatsoever. When a developer wants to tell a story, they need to put their foot down and say "Listen up, this is our game, that means it's our story, and we even built this whole game around it, so stop whining." That's how books have been doing it for millenia and humanity hasn't gotten bored with them. If the player wants to make their own story, they're reading this, so they have access to a perfectly good computer. Get typing.

The real problem with jRPGs isn't the linearity. It's that they HAVEN'T HAD A STORY WORTH TELLING IN OVER A DECADE. It's not that your storytelling methods suck Square, it's that the stories THEMSELVES suck, and the characters in them even moreso.

I was really hoping FF12 would be a sign that the rapid downfall of jRPGs was nearing its end and the flagship franchise was finally starting to get their sense back, but people like me, who want adventure with brave heroes and hateable villains seem to have all moved on. Ever since their ill-fated decision to allow Nomura to design characters for FF7, Square fandom has been plagued by weeaboos and otaku who want nothing more than pathetic main characters that give them false hope that they can ever do anything worthwhile as they are, villains that turn out good, because maybe all those mean bullies in middle school were just "misunderstood" and didn't mean what they did, and female characters that exist only to constantly support protagonists that any real girl would've been abandoned as the useless sacks of angst they are long ago.

A protagonist that acts as our frame of reference to the story without dominating it, and knows his place in a group with people far more relevant to the plot than him, offering advice when he has it (and it's good) and then shutting up and letting the important people talk? More importantly, a protagonist that's looking for the same thing any decent gamer is: adventure? Five out of six characters that are relevant to the plot? Writing that isn't groan-inducingly sugary and forced? A combat system that actually rewards cleverness (gambits) and reduces tedium(auto-attack)? A villain that isn't an alien, metaphysical evil force, or all-powerful magic-wielder? A villain that's ACTUALLY KIND OF A JERK? And he isn't trying to blow up the world?! And best of all, NO FANFICTION-QUALITY ROMANCE SUBPLOTS?! FF12 was the best FF since 6, easy, and look how the otaku responded.

Maybe one day, when the weeaboos go extinct (from not breeding, naturally), somebody will put Square back on the right track. Until then, if you have a single shred of integrity, don't even bother.

 

[Doug]

Of course we're looking at it from a western prospective... we live there duh. As for the story thing, Bioware and Bethesda manage just fine, making some of the most compelling stories around, choices have more impact because you're invested in the characters, in FF games you don't get choices.

Agreed. And its not the linearity thing that bugs me about this article - its the whole "Oh you would say that, YOUR WESTERNERS" thing that does.

Japan has always been kind of racist, but hardly ever gets called on it.

True, true. Although I'll admit I don't like Japan as a country. Ok, I don't like most Japanese games (Mario, No More Heroes, and Wak and Zik are expections).

But really, they seem vastly more xenophobic that my anti-Japan gaming.

 

[Thaius]

People need to stop hating linearity so much. It's a design choice, not a design flaw: what's with this ethnocentrism?

I see what he's saying: the more control you give the player, the less control you have as the designer. It makes telling a compelling story difficult. It's possible, but difficult. They want to tell us their story, and they are taking steps to ensure it. Linearity is not a bad thing, people. Final Fantasy has always told good stories, but in a different way than we do over here in the west: there is nothing wrong with that.

Yes but you would think now and then the series would evolve by more then just the graphics, linearity isn't the problem so much as having no choice about anything, they could throw the odd option at you now and then.

See though, the Final Fantasy series does change. Maybe it couldn't be seen as "evolution," but it changes. No Final Fantasy game can really be called the same. Even for a while, when the battle systems all followed the Active-Time formula, things worked differently. With "evolution," as we call it, a series adds new things and adjusts old ones with each entry, kind of stacking these changes up as the series goes along. Final Fantasy simply changes, delivering a completely different game each time. The battle system is never the same, the story is always different (and almost always really good), the characters are usually well-developed, the world and atmosphere changes from game to game... Final Fantasy may not evolve as most games do, but to say the series never changes is just not true.

As for choices, I still see nothing wrong with a lack of them. Control over the actual events of the story is not the only way to take advantage of gaming's unique interactive capabilities. Take Final Fantasy VII, for instance, when Cloud was being controlled, driven to kill Aerith. The player tries to press buttons to lead Cloud away, to lower his sword, but each button that is pressed only makes him raise the sword higher. Or Bioshock, how even though the player has full control of his character at all times, the one point where you really, really want it, you're deprived of it. These did not allow one to actually change the story, but they made for moments that were much more effective due to interactivity. Final Fantasy deals in these, delivering set stories with moments of interactivity to drive certain points home. And there's nothing wrong with that.

The battle system is basically the same it has been since FFVII, if not before then, adding in QTEs and the odd new battle command doesn't really make it a new system.

I never said the stories weren't great, they're okay but a little choice cannot hurt the franchise. It would just be nice to see a company that claims it pushes the envelope in the JRPG genre to take a new step instead of just "updating" the game with tweak between each one.

I respectfully disagree about the battle systems being the same. Sure, at their core, they're all turn-based battle systems, but those kinds of systems have never been about the actual systems, but rather about the customization surrounding them. The Materia system from FFVII, for instance, is nothing like the Licenses or Gambits from XII, or the drawing from VIII, or the sphere grid from X, or the simple "learn new spells at certain levels" system of older RPGs. Most of the battle systems may not have differences at a fundamental, battle-to-battle level, but turn-based battles are about customization outside of battle and strategic use of your setup in battle. And Final Fantasy changes that up completely from game to game.

The battle systems are, I said nothing about the levelling up and equiping etc, the way a battle is played works the same. Turn based battles in Final Fantasy aren't all about how you strategize and equip your characters when there's not much difficulty in the games. I am going to be honest, and this may be just me, but I can't remember the last time I got a game over in those games (Secret powerful bosses aside.) and that alone tells me the battle system needs a bit of work.

As for the story stuff, the story be straigh forward, but what I mean by choice that it could have a few objectives in the game you could get to choose which you do first is all.

From what I hear you heal after every battle in the game, where's the improvement there? That makes the game less challenging and less you have to do, taking things out like that aren't a way to improve the game.

I see what you mean there, though you must be really good if you've never gotten a game over. These games (gameplay-wise) are largely about being powerful enough to defeat the increasingly powerful enemies that appear as the game progresses. If you train and level up for hours, then difficulty won't be an issue. Otherwise, it actually gets rather difficult. You have control over how hard the game is, because you have control over how much you level grind. You want the pure experience, don't level grind; rely solely on the experience gained from the story missions. To be honest, unless you ran around leveling up a bunch, I don't see how the games could be considered too easy - and leveling up is your choice, not their mistake.

As for the healing, that would be a new thing in Final Fantasy XIII. I won't judge before I play, personally. I can see pros and cons to the idea, but I won't be able to see how said pros and cons fit together until I play the game. I'll withhold judgement on that topic until midnight on March 9th.

However, personally, I don't find an easy difficulty level to be a problem in story-driven games like this. The main effect that interactivity has on games like Final Fantasy is to make the game fun and to involve the player more in the story than a static observer in a movie. Both of these are accomplished regardless of difficulty: in fact, overwhelming difficulty can retract from both of these. Personally, in a battle like the one with Jenova at the end of disc 1 of Final Fantasy VII (I'm not giving spoilers, but you may remember it: the scene that makes many a gamer tear up at the mere playing of a certain character's theme), I don't want to die in that battle. I was emotionally ready to kill this thing, and death simply breaks the mood and forces you to try all over again. In this kind of game, I'd rather have a smooth story experience than a challenging gameplay one.

 

[Krythe]

Linear games can be good, however, too often to the game designers forget they're making a fucking GAME.

It's not a movie (The abomination that is advent children needs to go chew on a power cable and die), not a book (Ditto for MGS4). It's a game.

The whole point of gaming is to immerse yourself, which is only possible if you feel like your own actions have at least SOME SMALL IOTA OF IMPACT ON THE STORY. This whole "Western Standpoint" just screams cop-out to me.

Still, I'll admit to being a little bit biased. I only ever liked FFVI&FFVII.

FFVIII was a travesty in terms of both story and gameplay (Althought at it does get points for depicting the average teenager as they actually are, which is to say self-absorbed whiny dipshits with a persecution complex as opposed to selfless noble knights internalizing the philosophies of life.)

FFX was Crash Bandicoot the RPG and possibly the most egregious example of linear RPG gameplay in the series.

FFXII.... Bleehh.... *vomits* It is the only game I ever actually bought and couldn't finish simply because it was so fucking BORING and insipid. I honestly tried to, but then I put it down, drove but to EB, and switched it out. The characters were unlikeable, the combat was shit, the story was trite even by FF standards. There was absolutely nothing to like in it whatsoever.

In summary, I probably wasn't gonna get FFXIII anyways, but I still know how to spot an excuse when I hear one.

 

[chozo_hybrid]

People need to stop hating linearity so much. It's a design choice, not a design flaw: what's with this ethnocentrism?

I see what he's saying: the more control you give the player, the less control you have as the designer. It makes telling a compelling story difficult. It's possible, but difficult. They want to tell us their story, and they are taking steps to ensure it. Linearity is not a bad thing, people. Final Fantasy has always told good stories, but in a different way than we do over here in the west: there is nothing wrong with that.

Yes but you would think now and then the series would evolve by more then just the graphics, linearity isn't the problem so much as having no choice about anything, they could throw the odd option at you now and then.

See though, the Final Fantasy series does change. Maybe it couldn't be seen as "evolution," but it changes. No Final Fantasy game can really be called the same. Even for a while, when the battle systems all followed the Active-Time formula, things worked differently. With "evolution," as we call it, a series adds new things and adjusts old ones with each entry, kind of stacking these changes up as the series goes along. Final Fantasy simply changes, delivering a completely different game each time. The battle system is never the same, the story is always different (and almost always really good), the characters are usually well-developed, the world and atmosphere changes from game to game... Final Fantasy may not evolve as most games do, but to say the series never changes is just not true.

As for choices, I still see nothing wrong with a lack of them. Control over the actual events of the story is not the only way to take advantage of gaming's unique interactive capabilities. Take Final Fantasy VII, for instance, when Cloud was being controlled, driven to kill Aerith. The player tries to press buttons to lead Cloud away, to lower his sword, but each button that is pressed only makes him raise the sword higher. Or Bioshock, how even though the player has full control of his character at all times, the one point where you really, really want it, you're deprived of it. These did not allow one to actually change the story, but they made for moments that were much more effective due to interactivity. Final Fantasy deals in these, delivering set stories with moments of interactivity to drive certain points home. And there's nothing wrong with that.

The battle system is basically the same it has been since FFVII, if not before then, adding in QTEs and the odd new battle command doesn't really make it a new system.

I never said the stories weren't great, they're okay but a little choice cannot hurt the franchise. It would just be nice to see a company that claims it pushes the envelope in the JRPG genre to take a new step instead of just "updating" the game with tweak between each one.

I respectfully disagree about the battle systems being the same. Sure, at their core, they're all turn-based battle systems, but those kinds of systems have never been about the actual systems, but rather about the customization surrounding them. The Materia system from FFVII, for instance, is nothing like the Licenses or Gambits from XII, or the drawing from VIII, or the sphere grid from X, or the simple "learn new spells at certain levels" system of older RPGs. Most of the battle systems may not have differences at a fundamental, battle-to-battle level, but turn-based battles are about customization outside of battle and strategic use of your setup in battle. And Final Fantasy changes that up completely from game to game.

The battle systems are, I said nothing about the levelling up and equiping etc, the way a battle is played works the same. Turn based battles in Final Fantasy aren't all about how you strategize and equip your characters when there's not much difficulty in the games. I am going to be honest, and this may be just me, but I can't remember the last time I got a game over in those games (Secret powerful bosses aside.) and that alone tells me the battle system needs a bit of work.

As for the story stuff, the story be straigh forward, but what I mean by choice that it could have a few objectives in the game you could get to choose which you do first is all.

From what I hear you heal after every battle in the game, where's the improvement there? That makes the game less challenging and less you have to do, taking things out like that aren't a way to improve the game.

I see what you mean there, though you must be really good if you've never gotten a game over. These games (gameplay-wise) are largely about being powerful enough to defeat the increasingly powerful enemies that appear as the game progresses. If you train and level up for hours, then difficulty won't be an issue. Otherwise, it actually gets rather difficult. You have control over how hard the game is, because you have control over how much you level grind. You want the pure experience, don't level grind; rely solely on the experience gained from the story missions. To be honest, unless you ran around leveling up a bunch, I don't see how the games could be considered too easy - and leveling up is your choice, not their mistake.

As for the healing, that would be a new thing in Final Fantasy XIII. I won't judge before I play, personally. I can see pros and cons to the idea, but I won't be able to see how said pros and cons fit together until I play the game. I'll withhold judgement on that topic until midnight on March 9th.

However, personally, I don't find an easy difficulty level to be a problem in story-driven games like this. The main effect that interactivity has on games like Final Fantasy is to make the game fun and to involve the player more in the story than a static observer in a movie. Both of these are accomplished regardless of difficulty: in fact, overwhelming difficulty can retract from both of these. Personally, in a battle like the one with Jenova at the end of disc 1 of Final Fantasy VII (I'm not giving spoilers, but you may remember it: the scene that makes many a gamer tear up at the mere playing of a certain character's theme), I don't want to die in that battle. I was emotionally ready to kill this thing, and death simply breaks the mood and forces you to try all over again. In this kind of game, I'd rather have a smooth story experience than a challenging gameplay one.

Fair enough, I think we both have vaild points, I am going to make an effort to play this game just to see how it holds up then. You've convinced me to try it, and I don't level grind actually. I just haven't found it that hard... Hmmm, Tales of Symphonia has given me many a but whooping so I'm not immune to game overs or anything.

I guess we just have to wait and see how it holds up.

EDIT: Also, I do like to be challenged no matter what I play, otherwise I get bored. So difficulty is a bit of a thing for me.