Regulus Tera
Romanes Eunt Domus
Fimbulvetr said:No summons? They wouldn't....would they?
Summons are overrated to be honest.
Fimbulvetr said:No summons? They wouldn't....would they?
Regulus Tera said:Summons are overrated to be honest.
Regulus Tera said:Summons are overrated to be honest.
lorddarkflare said:...i do not like how it all looks in game, does not liking the game for something so shallow make me a monster?
Regulus Tera said:Summons are overrated to be honest.
batbeg said:Only in recent years are they.
As it plays out, 4 Warriors of Light bears a remarkable resemblance to the much-maligned Final Fantasy Mystic Quest for Super NES, too. Believe it or not, that's actually a good thing. The main similarities are the highly steamlined battle system and cute, kid-friendly art style. It doesn't seem to go quite as far as Mystic Quest in simplifying things, though; 4 Warriors of Light would better be described as "what Mystic Quest could have been if it hadn't been so cheaply made."
Aside from the whimsical visual style and the surprisingly retro chiptune audio style, 4 Warriors of Light features two specific standout elements. First is the job change system, which revolves around two dozen hats that the characters can collect and wear. The hats are, in essence, the same as Final Fantasy X-2's Dress Spheres (albeit they can't be changed on the fly during battle); donning one changes a character's class and opens up new skills. A white hood grants White Mage skills, while a laurel wreath turns a warrior into a Bard. As in Final Fantasy V and Tactics, characters seem able to mix and match all their learned skills as they switch jobs. Character graphics are instantly changed to reflect their current class, much as in the remake.
Secondly, the battle system is refreshing in its simplicity, yet doesn't seem to be a complete pushover. Combat in 4 Warriors of Light plays out in an extremely stripped-down form; there are no magic points to juggle, and characters can only equip a limited selection of abilities at any given time. In place of MP is a skill charge system represented by five ball icons. As players work through their turns, the balls at the top of their status window become illuminated to represent charges, and each combat action costs a certain number of charges. A simple attack costs a single point, while magic and special attacks cost more charges according to their strength and complexity. Skipping a turn adds two points to the meter.
Based on the boss battle at the end of the demo -- a Minotaur in a cave which the warriors have been sent to battle -- this turns the game's combat into a mildly strategic sort of tug-of-war. Two of the characters in the demo have access to the spell Fira, to which the Minotaur is vulnerable. But casting Fira costs two charge points, which take several turns of attacking to charge up. Spend a turn blocking, however, and you'll earn enough charges to cast the spell once, maybe twice. For the demo boss, this added a remarkable amount of strategy to a basic-looking battle system; beating him was a matter of alternating blocks and attacks, and healing when necessary.
Despite this give-and-take format, the combat system is surprisingly streamlined. It's not really possible to target attacks precisely, and neither can you target, say, a healing spell. When you cast Cure, you're not given the opportunity to select a recipient of the spell. Instead, when it comes time for your hero to cast the magic, it's directed toward the warrior who currently has the lowest HP. It's somewhat offputting to a seasoned RPG fan, but it's actually not a bad idea; few things are more annoying in a turn-based RPG to select a healing spell targeted toward a given character only to have a completely different party member injured before the spell can activate. This user-friendly magic system is the answer to that complaint.
It's not really possible to target attacks precisely, and neither can you target, say, a healing spell. When you cast Cure, you're not given the opportunity to select a recipient of the spell. Instead, when it comes time for your hero to cast the magic, it's directed toward the warrior who currently has the lowest HP.
duckroll said:What, you can't select targets? Weirrrrrrd.... ^^;
lorddarkflare said:This is odd, but it has potential, it is a good way of streamlining the combat while leaving control in the hands of the player.
I wonder if it can be disabled.
duckroll said:I doubt something like that is a feature with an on/off switch. When you design a game, you design and balance the game around a system, not the other way round. I don't like the sound of all this streamlining, but it does seem to be something S-E likes to explore lately. Just like how FFXIII has no full party control.
It's like they're posing to take the shot =)ninj4junpei said:Seems a bit off to me, I guess it's the way they are positioned. It's still a nice boxart.
Hobbun said:I agree. Like they are trying to appeal more to the casual gamer in making the game easier and faster. Not something I am liking, either. Main reason why I am not liking what I hear about FF XIII in having the no full party control.
duckroll said:I don't think it's entirely because they're trying to appeal to "casual gamers" or anything like that. It could simply be the direction they have decided to explore in terms of further developing interesting or unique gameplay systems. As game developers they also face constant challenges to keep gameplay fresh, while keeping it fun or challenging. One way is to streamline systems and controls which players have become too familiar with exploiting, to force players to focus their attention on other parts of the system. The other way of course is to make gameplay even more complicated and more strategic/tactical on a depth level. Considering the declining interest in games which are too hard or too complex, it's not surprising that they would not want to go down that route.
Making things less annoying and streamlining things isn't necessarily only for casual gamers... DQ has been doing similar things for a while now (though in DQ you do get to pick a group of enemies to "randomly" attack rather than having no choice at all). If it makes gameplay fast and fun I don't see what's wrong with it.Hobbun said:I agree. Like they are trying to appeal more to the casual gamer in making the game easier and faster. Not something I am liking, either. Main reason why I am not liking what I hear about FF XIII is not having the full party control.
duckroll said:I don't think it's entirely because they're trying to appeal to "casual gamers" or anything like that. It could simply be the direction they have decided to explore in terms of further developing interesting or unique gameplay systems. As game developers they also face constant challenges to keep gameplay fresh, while keeping it fun or challenging. One way is to streamline systems and controls which players have become too familiar with exploiting, to force players to focus their attention on other parts of the system. The other way of course is to make gameplay even more complicated and more strategic/tactical on a depth level. Considering the declining interest in games which are too hard or too complex, it's not surprising that they would not want to go down that route.
Hobbun said:And thats what I was getting at with my casual game reference. I know casual gamers are thrown out willy nilly by a lot of people, but my definition on it is someone who likes to play games, but they dont have the time, patience and also usually want games easier, as again, they can get them more quickly. Which goes in hand with your comment on people wanting less complicated and difficult games.
Either way, its possible FFG may end up being another game I wont have (want) to spend money on due to the changes developers feel are needed in the industry.
lorddarkflare said:Wow, this seems to happen to you quite often of late.
lorddarkflare said:Is there any RPG that you are now looking forward to?
This. SO MUCH THIS.Regulus Tera said:Summons are overrated to be honest.
Regulus Tera said:No targeting is still better than slashing midair if there's no monster there.
You do have some control over targeting attacks. It seems to be party-facing spells that don't allow you to choose the recipient. Buffs seem to affect all (but my only buff was from a Bard, so that's always the case), and Cure hits whoever has lowest HP (not the one who's missing the most from their HP max, but simply the lowest HP). Bear in mind that my observations derive from a loud, manic environment where a fussy woman was hovering constantly over my shoulder to rush me through the demo rather than giving me time to explore the game mechanics, so it's possible I've missed something.Tiktaalik said:JParish's preview made it sound really interesting to me, but no target control on the other hand is really bizarre. I like some of the ideas that they're presenting here, but I hope they don't go too far.
Well, this also comes down to how well the items are balanced. I would rather decide to have 15 useful items, which I have to use strategically, instead of flooding my inventory with 99 Hi-Potions, Phoenix Downs and whatnot.Yaweee said:I don't mind the lack of targeting if there's some consistent mechanic behind it (like Ogre Battle or Riviera), but that item limit? Fuck that. If there's one thing I hate in RPGs, it is spending an obscene amount of time managing inventory. Okay, that, unskippable cutscenes, and slow battle animations.
I get that developers want to restrict how much you can bring into dungeons or use in battle, but there ways to get the same effect without bogging down the entire game.
duckroll said:That's back in FFXIII!
duckroll said:I don't think it's entirely because they're trying to appeal to "casual gamers" or anything like that. It could simply be the direction they have decided to explore in terms of further developing interesting or unique gameplay systems. As game developers they also face constant challenges to keep gameplay fresh, while keeping it fun or challenging. One way is to streamline systems and controls which players have become too familiar with exploiting, to force players to focus their attention on other parts of the system. The other way of course is to make gameplay even more complicated and more strategic/tactical on a depth level. Considering the declining interest in games which are too hard or too complex, it's not surprising that they would not want to go down that route.
ToastyFrog said:You do have some control over targeting attacks. It seems to be party-facing spells that don't allow you to choose the recipient.
slaughterking said:Well, this also comes down to how well the items are balanced. I would rather decide to have 15 useful items, which I have to use strategically, instead of flooding my inventory with 99 Hi-Potions, Phoenix Downs and whatnot.
Yaweee said:That logic for heal spells doesn't work in practice. It's the same as Ogre Battle used, and that's the one area where the AI failed miserably.
Say you have two party members:
Priest 181/183 HP
Knight 200/350 HP
Who gets the heal? Not the person that actually needs it.
duckroll said:That's back in FFXIII!
duckroll said:What makes you think it's not calculated by % of HP left?
ToastyFrog said:You do have some control over targeting attacks. It seems to be party-facing spells that don't allow you to choose the recipient. Buffs seem to affect all (but my only buff was from a Bard, so that's always the case), and Cure hits whoever has lowest HP (not the one who's missing the most from their HP max, but simply the lowest HP). Bear in mind that my observations derive from a loud, manic environment where a fussy woman was hovering constantly over my shoulder to rush me through the demo rather than giving me time to explore the game mechanics, so it's possible I've missed something.
That is so stupidToastyFrog said:Cure hits whoever has lowest HP (not the one who's missing the most from their HP max, but simply the lowest HP).