UltimaKilo
Gold Member
How does the game run on GBA? Is it worth a buy? Thinking about picking it up tomorrow.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Final Fantasy Tactics Advance...
- Thread starter UltimaKilo
- Start date
Red Scarlet
Member
I could never get into it. It just didn't seem to have the 'magic' of the regular FFT. But I didn't very far at all. I'd imagine it plays fine on a GBA.
echoshifting
Banned
How does it run? Uh...fine? It's a GBA game... 
Lots of people disliked it...I played it through once and enjoyed it quite a bit. Just don't go in expecting a masterpiece like the original FFT; it doesn't come close.
Lots of people disliked it...I played it through once and enjoyed it quite a bit. Just don't go in expecting a masterpiece like the original FFT; it doesn't come close.
Red Scarlet
Member
Wasn't it like..the first GBA game? And came packaged with the GBA? Oh wait, it came with the SP.
Does the topic starter mean on a GBA or an SP? It seemed fine on an SP. May be hard to read on a regular GBA.
Does the topic starter mean on a GBA or an SP? It seemed fine on an SP. May be hard to read on a regular GBA.
I didn't play the original (I'm not a fan of the FF series), but this one was great, in my opinion. I spent days (Well, I could say months but that's just because I didn't have a lot of time to play it) on it and liked the whole jobs/missions mechanics.
One of the games I enjoyed the most on GBA.
It may take a few hours to get into the game, though... and a guide may be useful.
One of the games I enjoyed the most on GBA.
It may take a few hours to get into the game, though... and a guide may be useful.
Who´s saying FFT is perfect? It has flaws, but every game has them. However, the goods outnumber the bads by a wide margin. From the art direction, to the design, to the level design, to the characters, to the open system to customize your character... it´s nothing but brilliance burnt in a piece of palstic. The translation is poor, and percentages are a joke. There´s not balance in the story driven combats, but who cares? I don´t.iapetus said:
Pureauthor
Member
There were battles that were quite literally unplayable.
That should tell you all you need to know.
That should tell you all you need to know.
Its way too easy. I played through it, and completed it to 100%, but only because I had already beaten both Fire Emblems and I needed something to play on the way to/from work. The character classes are kind of interesting, and graphically its not bad -- its just a complete cakewalk compared to the original and the storyline is extremely weak. Pick up Fire Emblem Sacred Stones first, trust me.
DieNgamers
Member
I prefer it to Fire Emblem. It's a good game, so buy it.
PolyGone said:
You mean about two levels of the original. Outside of that it was one of the most abusable games in the history of mankind. And even then it's only true if you avoid the tough law combinations. The wrong set of laws against the wrong set of opponents and you can get totally taken to pieces in FFTA.
I also really dug it. The customization was super addictive, and it didn't take much time to clear a battlefield, a solid portable SRPG.
Though the plot never really had a hook, and most of the lauded "300 missions!" were passive, unplayable nonsense leaving you to dress up a paper doll properly in hopes of them fishing out some reward after a few battles. Decent concept(freebie goodies for taking advantage of the job system and such) but there was far too much of it.
Everyone pissed all over it, but I actually dug the judgement rules too. They messed with the typical killing strategy now and again and forced some unique challenges to actually succeeding in a battle.
Though the plot never really had a hook, and most of the lauded "300 missions!" were passive, unplayable nonsense leaving you to dress up a paper doll properly in hopes of them fishing out some reward after a few battles. Decent concept(freebie goodies for taking advantage of the job system and such) but there was far too much of it.
Everyone pissed all over it, but I actually dug the judgement rules too. They messed with the typical killing strategy now and again and forced some unique challenges to actually succeeding in a battle.
rockman zx
Member
FFTA is the most boring game of GBA,.
I've heard nothing but good things for Ogre Tactics. In fact, I think i'll check out some prices now.
FFTA rocked. I spent far too much time with that game, and almost cleared the whole damn thing. I'm a massive SRPG fan and Tactics Advance was splendid. The story wasn't so good, but it was good enough.
FFTA rocked. I spent far too much time with that game, and almost cleared the whole damn thing. I'm a massive SRPG fan and Tactics Advance was splendid. The story wasn't so good, but it was good enough.
Why does everyone keep mentioning Ogre Tactics? Are people being misled by the frequent use of Fantasy Advance Tactics Final?
Ahem.
FFTA is far from the worst game, and even far from the worst SRPG (let alone being the worst SRPG on the GBA). But it is also not a particularly good game, and its problems are many and varied.
1. It's too ****ing slow. Combat takes forever; characters kill each other with paper-cuts in the hopes that their enemies will wander off and bleed to death. That's ignoring the bad movement system that helps make things even slower. Battles in this game drag on way longer than they have any right to.
2. There is a complete absence of a plot more in-depth than Sesame Street Tactics Advance. Say what you will about the proper balance of story and gameplay in a game, but FFT is rightly lauded as possessing one of the finest stories in RPGs; to go from that to the kiddified wasteland that is FFTA is a sour and bitter pill.
3. Too much! Hey, I love customization and character options and lots of skills and abilities as much as the next guy, but FFTA actually goes overboard with these things. There's a staggering number of bland, repetitive, monotonous, forgettable, and uselessly redundant classes and abilities in the game, and it's really just a pain to deal with them all. It's one thing to put a ton of meaty abilities into a game... it's quite another to just clone classes and abilities and then not put any effort into them beyond that.
4. Which segues into... the menu system is terrible. In any RPG/SRPG, as much management of characters/items/classes/abilities as you'll be doing, a good menu system is key. It needs to present enough information to the player while still being quickly and efficiently navigable. FFTA's menu is an awkward, unwieldy mess that fails on each count.
5. Almost all generics and practically no unique, story-based characters. While the generics are ultimately more adaptable, customizable, and expendable, I've always derived a lot more enjoyment from acquiring and using story-based characters like Canopus, the Foriner Sisters, Guildus & Mildain, Byan & Forcas, etc. (from Tactics Ogre) or Agrias, Mustadio, Beowulf, etc. (from Final Fantasy Tactics). Similarly, Ogre Battle and Ogre Battle 64 had a sew of unique story-based characters, as did Tactics Ogre: The Knight of Lodis (Ivanna, Eleanor, Elric, etc.). FFTA doesn't. All generics, all the time.
These four things were more than enough to seriously detract from my ability to enjoy the game. It's... passable, I suppose, at best, but as I said, it should not be confused for a good game.
It does have some nice things going for it (nice music, great graphics, the law system was a wonderful idea that added a ton of additional and original strategy to the game, I liked the idea of using different races), but the problems with the game far outweigh the good in it.
Ahem.
FFTA is far from the worst game, and even far from the worst SRPG (let alone being the worst SRPG on the GBA). But it is also not a particularly good game, and its problems are many and varied.
1. It's too ****ing slow. Combat takes forever; characters kill each other with paper-cuts in the hopes that their enemies will wander off and bleed to death. That's ignoring the bad movement system that helps make things even slower. Battles in this game drag on way longer than they have any right to.
2. There is a complete absence of a plot more in-depth than Sesame Street Tactics Advance. Say what you will about the proper balance of story and gameplay in a game, but FFT is rightly lauded as possessing one of the finest stories in RPGs; to go from that to the kiddified wasteland that is FFTA is a sour and bitter pill.
3. Too much! Hey, I love customization and character options and lots of skills and abilities as much as the next guy, but FFTA actually goes overboard with these things. There's a staggering number of bland, repetitive, monotonous, forgettable, and uselessly redundant classes and abilities in the game, and it's really just a pain to deal with them all. It's one thing to put a ton of meaty abilities into a game... it's quite another to just clone classes and abilities and then not put any effort into them beyond that.
4. Which segues into... the menu system is terrible. In any RPG/SRPG, as much management of characters/items/classes/abilities as you'll be doing, a good menu system is key. It needs to present enough information to the player while still being quickly and efficiently navigable. FFTA's menu is an awkward, unwieldy mess that fails on each count.
5. Almost all generics and practically no unique, story-based characters. While the generics are ultimately more adaptable, customizable, and expendable, I've always derived a lot more enjoyment from acquiring and using story-based characters like Canopus, the Foriner Sisters, Guildus & Mildain, Byan & Forcas, etc. (from Tactics Ogre) or Agrias, Mustadio, Beowulf, etc. (from Final Fantasy Tactics). Similarly, Ogre Battle and Ogre Battle 64 had a sew of unique story-based characters, as did Tactics Ogre: The Knight of Lodis (Ivanna, Eleanor, Elric, etc.). FFTA doesn't. All generics, all the time.
These four things were more than enough to seriously detract from my ability to enjoy the game. It's... passable, I suppose, at best, but as I said, it should not be confused for a good game.
It does have some nice things going for it (nice music, great graphics, the law system was a wonderful idea that added a ton of additional and original strategy to the game, I liked the idea of using different races), but the problems with the game far outweigh the good in it.
DieNgamers
Member
I guess the thread starter should just play the game. Too many different views.
thorsilver
Member
Personally I loved this game. The graphics are lovely, the music is good, the customisation and job system are great fun to play with, and there is just loads of stuff to do. The story is crap, but I don't care about that because I just want to kill some stuff. My only major complaint is that the game is too easy after a time; but it took me about 40-50 hours to reach a point where battles were a breeze, so I can't complain about that much value in a portable game.
Bear in mind, OP, that folks like ethelred and others in this thread are SRPG experts and will rightly take more issue with the flaws in FFTA. I mostly just dabble in SRPGs now and again, and on that level the game is superb. If you are demanding of SRPGs, avoid; if you just want at least 50 hours of decent fun, buy buy buy.
Bear in mind, OP, that folks like ethelred and others in this thread are SRPG experts and will rightly take more issue with the flaws in FFTA. I mostly just dabble in SRPGs now and again, and on that level the game is superb. If you are demanding of SRPGs, avoid; if you just want at least 50 hours of decent fun, buy buy buy.
PepsimanVsJoe
Member
Yeah got tired of this one rather quickly(By comparison I played through FFT PSX twice). The law system was a nuisance but the lack of atmosphere was the main reason why I hated the game. I couldn't get into the characters, the story, or the world itself(they got sucked into a book? whatever). The snowball fight tutorial really took me out of the game and I struggled through it until they dumped an extra law per battle on me. Granted options exist for getting around the laws but I just didn't feel it was worth the effort to continue.
I'll just wait for FF12 for my Ivalice fix.
I'll just wait for FF12 for my Ivalice fix.
:lol :lol :lol I keep thinking, "Okay, now there is where the drama starts. Somebody's gonna inherit the throne to somewhere."Error2k4 said:all I remember the game starting with a snowball fight. :/
I remember FFT beginning with some epic CG awesome music and all that shit, FFTA on the other hand.... yeah
No. Never happened.
DieNgamers
Member
A good game remains a good game. Some folks who didn't like the atmosphere and its special qualities won't change this.
Jax said:
Error2k4 said:
You're entirely right, Error. It's NOT an excuse at all, in any way. Portability does not excuse a complete lack of a plot. There are plenty of portable games... or even if we restrict this to SRPGs, portable SRPGs with excellent plots. The two Fire Emblems come to mind. And while Knight of Lodis' story was nowhere near the quality of Let Us Cling Together (no ethnic cleansing! booooo!) at least they put some damn effort into it, created some new and interesting characters and involved the game's politics and religion and history into the plot.
Jax said:
Not at all representative of the genre.
Play Final Fantasy Tactics or Tactics Ogre: Let Us Cling Together -- those battles are damned fast. Especially in LUCT, where characters deal so much damage that if you're careless, you can get taken down by two counter-attacks, or a counter-attack followed by the enemy doing a regular attack. Or play Fire Emblem -- equally speedy. Characters have good-sized movement ranges (to reach the enemy quickly), they move there quickly, and then the attacks/killing progresses at a proper speed.
Totally different with FFTA -- and, to a lesser extent, Knight of Lodis (you can tell they were made by the same people), but KOL isn't quite as slow as FFTA and it makes up for that drawback in other ways.
DieNgamers said:
Except FFTA is not a particularly good game, for the reasons I went to great lengths to detail above.
I knew I was in for a bumpy ride once the kids got sucked into a Final Fantasy book.
I completely trounced this game, because unknowingly I was abusing the system (that's how easy it is to abuse, you can do it without even knowing) by keeping a stock of lower level people in my reserves. Fun for a while but then you have put up with the same fights time and time again. Not fun I'm a huge FF fan and to date this is the only FF that I've sold back. That should tell you something.
I completely trounced this game, because unknowingly I was abusing the system (that's how easy it is to abuse, you can do it without even knowing) by keeping a stock of lower level people in my reserves. Fun for a while but then you have put up with the same fights time and time again. Not fun
I'm a huge FF fan and to date this is the only FF that I've sold back. That should tell you something.iapetus said:
Not really. It's not subjective that there are practically no story-based playable characters in the game, especially when compared to FFT, TO: LUCT, OB, OB64, or TO: KOL. You can go and count. Here, I'll save you some trouble: I count 23 in LUCT, and off hand, 10 in FFT. I'll leave it to you to count how many there are in FFTA's main scenario.
It is not subjective that battles play out more slowly than FFT or TO: KOL by virtue of movement speed/range, animation speed, or damage dealt/received. Time these things. Look at the greater impact terrain has on limiting movement ranges in FFTA versus FFT/TO/TO: KOL or the lower average movement range across classes. Look at damage dealing based on level, stats, ability strength, and so on, and see how they are objectively lower.
And it is not subjective that a great, great many of the classes and abilities in the game are redundancies that are simply clones of multiple other abilities in the game.
Those are all entirely objective criticisms.
I'll grant you that poor menu design and information presentation is subjective. But subjectively, I considered the information and menus in FFT, TO: LUCT, and TO: KOL all to be far superior than in FFTA. Guess this is one point where we will, subjectively, disagree.
And I'll grant that in some regards plot criticisms are subjective. However, there are also considerably many objective analysis points one can make on plot, such as fewer story characters overall, the complexity of the story characters in the game, and lack of any deeper (or even comparable when looking at its predecessor) story threads such as politics, class, history, religion, or the human condition. Those are all objective facts.
JoshuaJSlone
Member
That sounds about right. The story is a lot more trite, and the job system is more of a pain to use due to menu design choices and jobs being split up by species. However, it retains most of the fun of the battle, and there's a lot of battle. My one playthrough of FFTA probably took about as much time as 2.5 plays of FFT.Fabiollo said:
My biggest complaint at this point is that I could not go through all the optional battles. It got to the point where to take Job A I needed item 1, which I could only get by going on Job B which required item 2, which I could only get by going on Job C which required item 3, which I didn't have. If there'd been someone else around to trade items with maybe that wouldn't have been so bad.
?Pureauthor said:
Having played FFTA a few years back and TO:KOL now, FFTA does seem quicker-paced and more full of option.Jefklak said: