• 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.
  • Hi Guest. We've rebooted and consolidated our Communities section, so be sure to check it out and subscribe to some threads. Thanks!

XenobladeX |Import OT| Discovery of Superb View: http://youtu.be/HgIXNOEv_40

chadboban

Member
May 11, 2013
3,336
0
0
Miiverse

Look at this guy looking like a futuristic sexy cupid


You guys never mentioned there was a Galaxy Monk class
















 

Vena

Member
Sep 2, 2014
16,385
0
0
It's not really arbitrary, though. If the content in the story quest is a certain level, than making the gate a level that allows you do have a chance against that content makes sense.
Its arbitrary in definition as in the definition of what level is appropriate is arbitrarily set by the developer. It could all be level 1 in designation for all it mattered, but then it comes down to a question of what level the developer "thinks is best" for the progression but even then, unless its 10+ levels above you... why can't you do its 5 levels before? This is why its always some arbitrary gate on progress.

Why does the collectathon McGuffin have to be 3 and not just 1?

Yeah, I guess I would have just preferred more exploration as a part of the story missions, so there's some guidance. Not giving any guidance is fine when it's presented as optional side content, and that's how it is presented in the game, but it quickly turns out to not be so optional, leaving you forced to go do a lot of content that completely lacks any meaningful context.
I think the context is in the whole idea of exploring the unknown world, but I understand your point.
 

TheMoon

Member
Jul 1, 2014
21,766
5
415
Just a heads up, the subtitle of the Western OT will definitely be "1, 2, 3, 4, WOOOO!!" :p
 

bigjig

Member
Aug 8, 2011
1,352
0
0
Ugh, please tell me kizuna quests get better than Lyn's quest. These rare materials are taking forever to drop :(
 

putarorex

Member
Dec 18, 2009
446
0
0
So annoying. I kind of wish there was an option to remove Lyn and Tatsu from the game. I guess I'm just too old for this shit now. Either that or cutscenes with voice acting ruined this overly cutesy and dumb stuff in JRPGs for me.
Amen to that. I am starting to think I'll just skip the cut scenes. Do Japanese Otaku really think this stuff is funny?

I like the world and the exploration, but the story and the characters in the game aren't doing it for me. I haven't got the Dolls yet. Does the story improve? I liked the story in the 3DS game (about 30 hours into that one), so this has been a bit disappointing.

With combat I feel like I am playing a rhythm game when I am not trying to knock down the mob. I just go with the color of the callout to ensure I get the HP boost, sometimes not worrying about what the Art does. Most times that seems to work.

I was hoping I could finish the game before Witcher 3 comes out, but I can only play a few hours before I get a bit bored.
 

Hours Left

Member
Jun 28, 2006
33,689
1
0
My friend was working on it a bit, I think she did about half of it. Whenever I get time I'll try to finish it up. It's much less interesting, now that we can actually play the game.
And it was extremely boring and a total of one thing happened.
Thanks, I appreciate it. :)

It's not the most interesting story that's for sure, but I would like to see how it ends.
 

StreetsAhead

Member
Jun 13, 2011
12,626
0
0
So annoying. I kind of wish there was an option to remove Lyn and Tatsu from the game. I guess I'm just too old for this shit now. Either that or cutscenes with voice acting ruined this overly cutesy and dumb stuff in JRPGs for me.
I dunno about removing them, but yeah. It can be annoying. They were much more tolerable in the last two Affinity Quests I did (Refresh & Day in the Life of BLADE, I think). Not a single bad joke.
 

Zefah

Member
Jan 7, 2007
33,622
239
1,120
I dunno about removing them, but yeah. It can be annoying. They were much more tolerable in the last to Affinity Quests I did (Refresh & Day in the Life of BLADE, I think). Not a single bad joke.
Even if Day in the Life of BLADE, it bothered me, but maybe I'm just more sensitive to it. The set up of Tatsu in the cliche "boke" comedy relief role and Lyn as the "tsukkomi" (and doubling as loli cute stuff for the... uh... "audience" that likes that kind of thing) for is just so apparent...
 

SoraanTribal

Member
Nov 4, 2011
7,269
0
0
This is simply preference to design. You prefer a linear, slim structure for story progression, that's fine.
I'm definitely one of those types of people. I loved how the story and area progression was linear in Xenoblade personally. The areas themselves were obviously non-linear in design so there was still great opportunities for exploration, but you had to progress from area to area in a linear fashion. I loved that and for me, the game never felt like you had to "explore 20% of first continent" to progress the story. That's just a bit silly to me. One of them incorporates exploration into the main story just by how it unfolds and one of them places a restriction on progressing in a story and popping up a box telling you that you have to explore more and do a heart-to-heart quest before you can continue. It's a little immersion breaking as well.
 

Overside

Banned
Dec 28, 2014
3,060
0
0
Yeah, from what I've been reading these have been my main concerns (along with the battle system, but I gave up on that part since the announcement, so wtv). Blade already had a pretty straightforward story compared to previous Xeno games (despite still being an amazing story), and this seems to be even more simple (while apparently still being an amazing story =P).

The required side stuff also bugged me, but then I remembered that I'll be doing side stuff anyway, so yeah.
This is not remotely true

Xenoblade curb stomps both saga and gears simplistic and literally interpereted use of their source materials to make a story thats more complex than simple surface face value.

Xenoblade left a far higher story bar for x to meet in regaurds to the complexity of the story.... And it wasnt even a xeno game.

The decade plus of experience definately shows.
 

Vena

Member
Sep 2, 2014
16,385
0
0
I'm definitely one of those types of people. I loved how the story and area progression was linear in Xenoblade personally. The areas themselves were obviously non-linear in design so there was still great opportunities for exploration, but you had to progress from area to area in a linear fashion. I loved that and for me, the game never felt like you had to "explore 20% of first continent" to progress the story. That's just a bit silly to me. One of them incorporates exploration into the main story just by how it unfolds and one of them places a restriction on progressing in a story and popping up a box telling you that you have to explore more and do a heart-to-heart quest before you can continue. It's a little immersion breaking as well.
That's fine but that's the strength of a linear story structure. Try to take Xenoblade's world and layout and progression and story, and then try to put that over XCX's world. It wouldn't work because nothing, effectively, stops me from going to the High Entia in such a world except for a magical forcefield or going all the way to the Mechonis' head aside from some magic forcefield or wherever else I want to go which would break the lore entirely. When you make a connected, open world without story-blocks to impede progress, you can't really keep the story linearly structured. Imagine, for instance, trying to play FFIX but with the Invincible available from the moment you start the game... the story would break with a sickening crack because, while its framed in a huge world, said world is artificially tiered by impassable blocks that keep the world at large completely out of the player's reach until the important story elements are resolved. But in having this gated story and world, they can design a story around an evolution of and progression through the world. Much like Xenoblade.

That said Xenoblade had plenty of its own "do X for Y" within the story which on my recent play through felt like nothing but chores, its just that they were better hidden, like the aforementioned "fetch me x things to progress here". But I question this "non-linear in design" thing about Xenoblade, most of it was long corridors (dungeons) with interspersed map segments that were open-ish. I mean, take the iconic Gaur Plains, its huge but its still really just a long line with a bunch of divergent dead ends.

I don't think needing to explore to progress the story is necessarily any more immersion breaking than a pop-up with every quest that tells you "go here" or "find me x" that accompanied every Xenoblade quest.

When you make an RPG world that is truly seamless, then you really have to have different ways of tiering the story. Whether that be "You must be this tall to ride." or "You must have found Z McGuffing from Mt.Doom to progress on your journey further." or "You need to have seen X% of this world to move forward!", you can't just have what are effectively progress flags along the road of the map because a character/player can randomly end up there from exploring a seamless world. (As per the aforementioned, it would make zero-lore sense for me to end up on the Mechonis' head before the story ever even gets anywhere near there.) Its a sacrifice for the type of game and in this case, for the center piece of the game which is said seamless open world.

The Dolls really screw it up ever further in terms of narrative structure having a linear nature.

Even if Day in the Life of BLADE, it bothered me, but maybe I'm just more sensitive to it. The set up of Tatsu in the cliche "boke" comedy relief role and Lyn as the "tsukkomi" (and doubling as loli cute stuff for the... uh... "audience" that likes that kind of thing) for is just so apparent...
Monolith seems to have their desire to always include the "annoying kid and sidekick" characters. We had it in Xenoblade with Juju and Riki (and Reyn).
 

Zefah

Member
Jan 7, 2007
33,622
239
1,120
Monolith seems to have their desire to always include the "annoying kid and sidekick" characters. We had it in Xenoblade with Juju and Riki (and Reyn).
Kind of had it even in Xenogears now that I think about it, but I guess it didn't bother me because it was just text and a portrait with maybe a sound effect or two.
 

Vena

Member
Sep 2, 2014
16,385
0
0
Kind of had it even in Xenogears now that I think about it, but I guess it didn't bother me because it was just text and a portrait with maybe a sound effect or two.
They have a lot of speech in Xenoblade. :p
 

SoraanTribal

Member
Nov 4, 2011
7,269
0
0
That's fine but that's the strength of a linear story structure. Try to take Xenoblade's world and layout and progression and story, and then try to put that over XCX's world. It wouldn't work because nothing, effectively, stops me from going to the High Entia in such a world except for a magical forcefield or going all the way to the Mechonis' head aside from some magic forcefield or wherever else I want to go which would break the lore entirely. When you make a connected, open world without story-blocks to impede progress, you can't really keep the story linearly structured. Imagine, for instance, trying to play FFIX but with the Invincible available from the moment you start the game... the story would break with a sickening crack because, while its framed in a huge world, said world is artificially tiered by impassable blocks that keep the world at large completely out of the player's reach until the important story elements are resolved. But in having this gated story and world, they can design a story around an evolution of and progression through the world. Much like Xenoblade.

That said Xenoblade had plenty of its own "do X for Y" within the story which on my recent play through felt like nothing but chores, its just that they were better hidden, like the aforementioned "fetch me x things to progress here". But I question this "non-linear in design" thing about Xenoblade, most of it was long corridors (dungeons) with interspersed map segments that were open-ish. I mean, take the iconic Gaur Plains, its huge but its still really just a long line with a bunch of divergent dead ends.



I don't think needing to explore to progress the story is necessarily any more immersion breaking than a pop-up with every quest that tells you "go here" or "find me x" that accompanied every Xenoblade quest.

When you make an RPG world that is truly seamless, then you really have to have different ways of tiering the story. Whether that be "You must be this tall to ride." or "You must have found Z McGuffing from Mt.Doom to progress on your journey further." or "You need to have seen X% of this world to move forward!", you can't just have what are effectively progress flags along the road of the map because a character/player can randomly end up there from exploring a seamless world. (As per the aforementioned, it would make zero-lore sense for me to end up on the Mechonis' head before the story ever even gets anywhere near there.) Its a sacrifice for the type of game and in this case, for the center piece of the game which is said seamless open world.

The Dolls really screw it up ever further in terms of narrative structure having a linear nature.



Monolith seems to have their desire to always include the "annoying kid and sidekick" characters. We had it in Xenoblade with Juju and Riki (and Reyn).
I mean, the map you posted of Gaur Plains still doesn't give me a "linear" vibe. Maybe partially because of how small of an image it is, but when you're exploring the area, it feels very non-linear. Lots of little paths you can take to find something, falling down into that spider infested area, or going up to the top level through other paths. FFXIII or an Uncharted game would be what I'd call linear level design. The area progression is linear in Xenoblade, but most of the areas were not (minus the places like maybe Ether Mines). We'll just have to disagree on that, I guess.

It's probably just a personal preference, but I would much prefer the game tell me "You need to go get this magic mcguffin or hit these three switches" to progress into the story than something straight up telling you to go explore and get a certain percentage. One of those sounds much better to me than the other. It makes exploring their beautiful world feel like more of a job or required aspect than something I want to do for fun simply because the game makes you for the story. And yes, I know that in Xenoblade, it tells you to go somewhere to find something so that's still kind of forcing you to explore, but it doesn't feel that way to me. *shrug*

--

I never minded Juju that much and Riki was the AWESOME heropon! I doubt I'll have big issues with Lyn and Tatsu.
 

Overside

Banned
Dec 28, 2014
3,060
0
0
Kind of had it even in Xenogears now that I think about it, but I guess it didn't bother me because it was just text and a portrait with maybe a sound effect or two.
Chu and the kid.

That irritated me.

But they made it to me by crucifying the annoying little rodent.

I think that was the main reason i skipped riki entirely on my first playthrough of blade. Watching japanese gameplay didnt help either, as he was exactly what i was expecting.

I got to hand it to whoever did rikis localised voice and dialog though, once i actually tried him and heard some of his party specific banter i was cracking up. Well lampshaded, I can only hope tatsu will be handled as well.
 

Vena

Member
Sep 2, 2014
16,385
0
0
I mean, the map you posted of Gaur Plains still doesn't give me a "linear" vibe. Maybe partially because of how small of an image it is, but when you're exploring the area, it feels very non-linear. Lots of little paths you can take to find something, falling down into that spider infested area, or going up to the top level through other paths. FFXIII or an Uncharted game would be what I'd call linear level design. The area progression is linear in Xenoblade, but most of the areas were not (minus the places like maybe Ether Mines). We'll just have to disagree on that, I guess.
FFXIII is a corridor game, its exceptionally linear. The reason I say that Xenoblade is linear is because it is gated, as per my examples with FFIX. The game is not a corridor-linear game (outside of its dungeons, a lot of them are straight lines, more or less) but when you look at how the game progresses, its done so in a point to point manner, like a line. You can verge off the beaten path for any particular map/segment but you cannot break out of the flow. I would frame FFXIII as, effectively, a glorified rail-shooter and Xenoblade (or a lot of older jRPGs) as a linear story in a linearly progressed world. They are linear to different degrees.

XCX is more along the lines of blending Skyrim quest structure for story progression with some JRPG/MMO elements. Western RPGs are all over the "complete quest for some guy" to progress story (like the character quests that progress the story here), which happens here a lot as well. The only weird one is the % exploration one which is like the "must be this level to do" sort of thing, straight from an MMO.

I think the %-thing may just be a bit of an oversimplification or oversight on the part of Monolith, they probably thought it was a non-issue and easy way to put some sort of clause on progression. That or, given the focus on exploring for the lore of NLA, they thought it was the best way to incorporate the "development of the settlement and growth" into gameplay mechanics. The latter seems reasonable.
 
Aug 12, 2013
1,750
0
340
This is not remotely true

Xenoblade curb stomps both saga and gears simplistic and literally interpereted use of their source materials to make a story thats more complex than simple surface face value.

Xenoblade left a far higher story bar for x to meet in regaurds to the complexity of the story.... And it wasnt even a xeno game.

The decade plus of experience definately shows.
Since you have not yet mentioned the specifics of your praise for Blade, I can only assume you are referring to theories regarding its references to Monadic metaphysics and Gnostic forms of religion. Articles such as this one on the game's use of monadism to display "the death of the author" and this one analyzing the Gnostic trinity in the game seem like interesting pieces of analysis for the game. I'm impressed by the game's apparent hidden depths, but I can't quite see as how it "curb stomps" both Gears and Saga.
Granted, I have very little authority to argue these games' narrative complexities, as all I have to judge them by are the rough summaries of both games/series that I've happened to be spoiled about. I'm just genuinely curious how these games can be so praised by many while you seem very adamant against their merit so an explanation would be really interesting to hear. It seems to me like an understandable, yet unnecessary, instinct to protect Xenoblade's equal (or greater, I wouldn't know as I haven't finished any other "xeno game") depth of narrative and artistic value against fans of the other two who reject the game unfairly as "not worthy of the xeno name" due to an over simplified perspective of believing the game to be simply a "shounen adventure story" they stuck to after first glance of the game.
I can understand the frustration, especially as I read this otherwise very enlightening and intriguing article analysing the first two "xeno" projects in depth. At reaching the fourth part I found the article switch from a fascinating investigation and presentation of the development of the "xeno" metaseries, into what appeared to be mostly an article focused on explaining just why Xenoblade is a "a cool game for gamers" but nothing more, even going so far as to vaguely assert the idea that video games inherently lack the ability for narrative depth, and that Takahashi and Soraya Saga would have had better success had they been able to make the story into a film, television, or novel series (which is obviously untrue given the use of Monadic theory/metaphysics to enhance the interaction between game and gamer with Blade).
I found this shift to be somewhat dissapointing, more so after reading the two earlier articles I linked to. But I would not blame anyone for having missed the message about monads and the way this weaves into the game's systems and narratives similarly to MGS2, after all I didn't have any real idea about the game's depth regarding this except for some mentioning of this in a far earlier Xenoblade X hype thread, (I think the poster may have been you). I of course had understood the game's gnostic influences after completing it, but the Monadic part is indeed very difficult to grasp at first. I can't anyone for being unable to see it unassisted. So instead of simply labeling such people as "unable to see the big picture" and leaving it at that, why not at least link them to such articles as the first two above.
For someone like me, who is relatively new to the discussion regarding all of these games (beat Xenoblade last year after starting the year before with a huge break between), it would helpful to spread the knowledge for newcomers, so that everyone can be brought into the discussion and understand the breadth of the story's focus. And to so concretely proclaim the first two "xeno" projects as simple plots without merit, without explanation seems similar to the arguments of the third article and its absolutist rejection of a great game and narrative. It does not set a good tone for enthusiastic discussion of any of the projects, and I am genuinely interested in what you have to say on the subject.
 

Hours Left

Member
Jun 28, 2006
33,689
1
0
I'm not ashamed that the aspect of the game I'm most excited about is dressing up all my characters in cool outfits and then just cruising around battling monsters and raising affinity.
 

jj984jj

He's a pretty swell guy in my books anyway.
Aug 30, 2005
22,609
0
0
32
Toronto, ON
:( Sounds a little disappointing tbh, but I have ridiculously high expectations for Takahashi games. Xenogears, Xenosaga ep1, Xenoblade were all amazing stories full of great characters and memorable plots. Xenoblade X from what I've played and your opinions seems like it's gonna be a lot more gameplay focused and less about going on a memorable rpg adventure with an interesting story.

Or maybe it's because I spent like $500+ for the game/hw bundle (and I doubt I'll use my JP-Wii U for much else since the system is practically dead already), so I'm expecting something that will blow me away like the original Xenoblade did (best jrpg of the PS3/X360/Wii 7 year generation by a mile).

I'm definitely enjoying Xenoblade X, but I have to try really hard to not compare it to Xenoblade when I play because it just makes me sad that so far most of the stuff I loved about Xenoblade are missing (though Xenoblade X has a lot of cool additions that Xenoblade didn't have). They're such totally different games, and Xenoblade X on its own seems like a great jrpg, just it's hard not to compare it to Xenoblade which had probably the most interesting jrpg setting in decades, and a cool story + beautiful locations & music.
I'm gonna miss that too, especially all the beautiful locations. I'm guessing there's lots of nice views, but it's disappointing that we've already seen the continents this game has to offer.

FFXIII is a corridor game, its exceptionally linear. The reason I say that Xenoblade is linear is because it is gated, as per my examples with FFIX. The game is not a corridor-linear game (outside of its dungeons, a lot of them are straight lines, more or less) but when you look at how the game progresses, its done so in a point to point manner, like a line. You can verge off the beaten path for any particular map/segment but you cannot break out of the flow. I would frame FFXIII as, effectively, a glorified rail-shooter and Xenoblade (or a lot of older jRPGs) as a linear story in a linearly progressed world. They are linear to different degrees.

XCX is more along the lines of blending Skyrim quest structure for story progression with some JRPG/MMO elements. Western RPGs are all over the "complete quest for some guy" to progress story (like the character quests that progress the story here), which happens here a lot as well. The only weird one is the % exploration one which is like the "must be this level to do" sort of thing, straight from an MMO.

I think the %-thing may just be a bit of an oversimplification or oversight on the part of Monolith, they probably thought it was a non-issue and easy way to put some sort of clause on progression. That or, given the focus on exploring for the lore of NLA, they thought it was the best way to incorporate the "development of the settlement and growth" into gameplay mechanics. The latter seems reasonable.
Story and progression were linear but it opens up pretty quickly. If they had better quests it would've been more worth exploring the non-linear aspects, and seemed more linear than it should. I would definitely argue if raising your affinity level with the towns and doing side-quests was more worthwhile that it wasn't quite so simple to label it as linear.

But I think a disappointing aspect of what I've seen in Xenoblade X is that it's using its non-linearity as an excuse for not having more populated locations. I really dislike the fact that everything revolves around NLA, it doesn't look like a place interesting enough to constantly return to. I'll probably enjoy exploring these 5 grand landscapes at least, but I'm pretty disappointed that the setting looks to provide even less diversity than even the Bionis and Mechonis did. I guess I was wishing for something more in between, and the game didn't have to be linear to achieve that. I just hope it won't hamper my enjoyment of the game too much.
 

Vena

Member
Sep 2, 2014
16,385
0
0
Story and progression were linear but it opens up pretty quickly. If they had better quests it would've been more worth exploring the non-linear aspects, and seemed more linear than it should. I would definitely argue if raising your affinity level with the towns and doing side-quests was more worthwhile that it wasn't quite so simple to label it as linear.

But I think a disappointing aspect of what I've seen in Xenoblade X is that it's using its non-linearity as an excuse for not having more populated locations. I really dislike the fact that everything revolves around NLA, it doesn't look like a place interesting enough to constantly return to. I'll probably enjoy exploring these 5 grand landscapes at least, but I'm pretty disappointed that the setting looks to provide even less diversity than even the Bionis and Mechonis did. I guess I was wishing for something more in between, and the game didn't have to be linear to achieve that. I just hope it won't hamper my enjoyment of the game too much.
I'm convinced I played some other Xenoblade game than most of you.

I mean, even just looking at my save on the 3DS right now, most of the regions are entirely one-offs through which I'd pass once and never go back for anything short of farming materials. The Mechonis sections always felt very linear in layout but tend to be more intricate in design. Outside of Alcamoth, Valak, and Guar (and I guess Colony 9 out of the strong first impressions)... I can't say I have much attachment to anything else on the Bionis either. A lot of the game just feels vacuous and "I just need to get through here for the next interesting part" to me when I look at it. Crabs and rabbits, that is what the Bionis makes me think about... crabs and rabbits and brogs.

It says a lot about its story, though, because I love playing through the game in spite of that quip about a lot of the regions you have trod through.
 

Bebpo

Banned
Jun 7, 2004
30,398
1
0
38
Orange County, CA
I actually thought there were some cool dungeon designs in the original, like the underground mine area and the giant robot fortress on the mech god. Dunno if X will have many/any tightly designed dungeons. I like the skyrim comparisons, I think Takahashi's a huge wrpg fan and he wanted to make a Bethesda style game and that comes with all the flaws and limitations of the format.
 

Bebpo

Banned
Jun 7, 2004
30,398
1
0
38
Orange County, CA
It was actually interesting reading the Iwata Asks. Towards the end Takahashi says with Xenoblade they finally hit the perfect balance between Y (story) and X (gameplay) [since his past games had too much story, not enough gameplay]

But then he goes on to say so this time with XB X they decided to focus even further on the X (gameplay), which begs the question of if you already had the perfect balance, why change the balance?
 

Vena

Member
Sep 2, 2014
16,385
0
0
It was actually interesting reading the Iwata Asks. Towards the end Takahashi says with Xenoblade they finally hit the perfect balance between Y (story) and X (gameplay) [since his past games had too much story, not enough gameplay]

But then he goes on to say so this time with XB X they decided to focus even further on the X (gameplay), which begs the question of if you already had the perfect balance, why change the balance?
Nothing is perfect. You have achieved what you believe is optimal but it you may be able to achieve an even better state by working on it.

Status quo leads to stagnation.
 

Bebpo

Banned
Jun 7, 2004
30,398
1
0
38
Orange County, CA
Or Takahashi is getting old and moving into a more studio management position ala Suda51 and the games will feel less and less like a "Takahashi" game and like Suda will never live up to his early games full of passion and artistry.

Worst case scenario :p

Best case scenario is we get a Baten Kaitos-like unique game as more BK staff rise up to directorial decision making positions.

I do think XBX signals Takahashi stepping back from hands on development.
 
Aug 12, 2013
1,750
0
340
I do think XBX signals Takahashi stepping back from hands on development.
???
It seems you may be reaching here. Most comments he has made about the game make it seem like he believes it to be his best game yet. It seems just as personal as always, if not more given the apparently massive amount of writing he has done on the game (reportedly more than for any other game). He said the game was a "crystallization of the staff's blood and tears" or something to that effect, and remarked about how he had "finally made a JRPG where humans and robots could co-exist". I think you may be worrying yourself too much over nothing. Even if it doesn't feel stereotypically "Takahashi/Xeno"-esque enough, it doesn't mean it isn't the guy's style, people change.
 

Lumyst

Member
Jun 18, 2013
1,372
0
0
It doesn't sound like there's any loss of passion on the creators' parts in the Iwata Asks, in fact, the pillars of the project were open world, and exploring with mechs, which were achieved.. It sounds like this open world style is the direction they wanted for the Xenoblade series. I do suspect though that as this is both their first open world, and first HD title, that they might have gone through some challenges. If they continue with this series, they'll of course get even better at it, now that they've laid the foundation. That was how it was with other developers when they moved to HD as well :p
 

aravuus

Member
Aug 30, 2012
12,606
0
0
Since you have not yet mentioned the specifics of your praise for Blade, I can only assume you are referring to theories regarding its references to Monadic metaphysics and Gnostic forms of religion. Articles such as this one on the game's use of monadism to display "the death of the author" and this one analyzing the Gnostic trinity in the game seem like interesting pieces of analysis for the game. I'm impressed by the game's apparent hidden depths, but I can't quite see as how it "curb stomps" both Gears and Saga.
Granted, I have very little authority to argue these games' narrative complexities, as all I have to judge them by are the rough summaries of both games/series that I've happened to be spoiled about. I'm just genuinely curious how these games can be so praised by many while you seem very adamant against their merit so an explanation would be really interesting to hear. It seems to me like an understandable, yet unnecessary, instinct to protect Xenoblade's equal (or greater, I wouldn't know as I haven't finished any other "xeno game") depth of narrative and artistic value against fans of the other two who reject the game unfairly as "not worthy of the xeno name" due to an over simplified perspective of believing the game to be simply a "shounen adventure story" they stuck to after first glance of the game.
I can understand the frustration, especially as I read this otherwise very enlightening and intriguing article analysing the first two "xeno" projects in depth. At reaching the fourth part I found the article switch from a fascinating investigation and presentation of the development of the "xeno" metaseries, into what appeared to be mostly an article focused on explaining just why Xenoblade is a "a cool game for gamers" but nothing more, even going so far as to vaguely assert the idea that video games inherently lack the ability for narrative depth, and that Takahashi and Soraya Saga would have had better success had they been able to make the story into a film, television, or novel series (which is obviously untrue given the use of Monadic theory/metaphysics to enhance the interaction between game and gamer with Blade).
I found this shift to be somewhat dissapointing, more so after reading the two earlier articles I linked to. But I would not blame anyone for having missed the message about monads and the way this weaves into the game's systems and narratives similarly to MGS2, after all I didn't have any real idea about the game's depth regarding this except for some mentioning of this in a far earlier Xenoblade X hype thread, (I think the poster may have been you). I of course had understood the game's gnostic influences after completing it, but the Monadic part is indeed very difficult to grasp at first. I can't anyone for being unable to see it unassisted. So instead of simply labeling such people as "unable to see the big picture" and leaving it at that, why not at least link them to such articles as the first two above.
For someone like me, who is relatively new to the discussion regarding all of these games (beat Xenoblade last year after starting the year before with a huge break between), it would helpful to spread the knowledge for newcomers, so that everyone can be brought into the discussion and understand the breadth of the story's focus. And to so concretely proclaim the first two "xeno" projects as simple plots without merit, without explanation seems similar to the arguments of the third article and its absolutist rejection of a great game and narrative. It does not set a good tone for enthusiastic discussion of any of the projects, and I am genuinely interested in what you have to say on the subject.
Yoo I want to hear it too. Quoting this wall of text so it won't be lost in midst of all the pics.

I mean, this is still kind of fascinating stuff, even though I said a bit otherwise. But it was 6am, I was on my phone, I couldn't sleep and I was pissed the fuck off because of it.
 

Overside

Banned
Dec 28, 2014
3,060
0
0
Since you have not yet mentioned the specifics of your praise for Blade, I can only assume you are referring to theories regarding its references to Monadic metaphysics and Gnostic forms of religion. Articles such as this one on the game's use of monadism to display "the death of the author" and this one analyzing the Gnostic trinity in the game seem like interesting pieces of analysis for the game. I'm impressed by the game's apparent hidden depths, but I can't quite see as how it "curb stomps" both Gears and Saga.
Granted, I have very little authority to argue these games' narrative complexities, as all I have to judge them by are the rough summaries of both games/series that I've happened to be spoiled about. I'm just genuinely curious how these games can be so praised by many while you seem very adamant against their merit so an explanation would be really interesting to hear. It seems to me like an understandable, yet unnecessary, instinct to protect Xenoblade's equal (or greater, I wouldn't know as I haven't finished any other "xeno game") depth of narrative and artistic value against fans of the other two who reject the game unfairly as "not worthy of the xeno name" due to an over simplified perspective of believing the game to be simply a "shounen adventure story" they stuck to after first glance of the game.
I can understand the frustration, especially as I read this otherwise very enlightening and intriguing article analysing the first two "xeno" projects in depth. At reaching the fourth part I found the article switch from a fascinating investigation and presentation of the development of the "xeno" metaseries, into what appeared to be mostly an article focused on explaining just why Xenoblade is a "a cool game for gamers" but nothing more, even going so far as to vaguely assert the idea that video games inherently lack the ability for narrative depth, and that Takahashi and Soraya Saga would have had better success had they been able to make the story into a film, television, or novel series (which is obviously untrue given the use of Monadic theory/metaphysics to enhance the interaction between game and gamer with Blade).
I found this shift to be somewhat dissapointing, more so after reading the two earlier articles I linked to. But I would not blame anyone for having missed the message about monads and the way this weaves into the game's systems and narratives similarly to MGS2, after all I didn't have any real idea about the game's depth regarding this except for some mentioning of this in a far earlier Xenoblade X hype thread, (I think the poster may have been you). I of course had understood the game's gnostic influences after completing it, but the Monadic part is indeed very difficult to grasp at first. I can't anyone for being unable to see it unassisted. So instead of simply labeling such people as "unable to see the big picture" and leaving it at that, why not at least link them to such articles as the first two above.
For someone like me, who is relatively new to the discussion regarding all of these games (beat Xenoblade last year after starting the year before with a huge break between), it would helpful to spread the knowledge for newcomers, so that everyone can be brought into the discussion and understand the breadth of the story's focus. And to so concretely proclaim the first two "xeno" projects as simple plots without merit, without explanation seems similar to the arguments of the third article and its absolutist rejection of a great game and narrative. It does not set a good tone for enthusiastic discussion of any of the projects, and I am genuinely interested in what you have to say on the subject.
Namco Bandais abomination isnt even in the running. They thought they could write a better Xeno story than the people takahashi chose, and blew chunks, and MSoft spent the rest of the time trying to unscrew it.

I never said Gears was without merit. At its time there was really nothing else like it. Doesnt change the fact it was an incredibly straightforward and literal interpretation of Freud.

The Id is named Id, its a red glowing, raging super powered ass. You cant get more literal on the nose freud unless you give him a 6 foot dong to smash gears with.

but yeah, the frequency with which xeno fans who read an article detailing the plot of gears, and how it makes the story work, and then turn around apply nothing they learned, and state xenoblade is a straight forward simplistic story because no one wrote an article breaking it down for them is getting incredibly irritating, as simply accepting a story at face value without putting another thought into the matter is the exact opposite thing anyone who is a fan of xeno games should do.

As for Xenoblade...

Those are cool articles, but they both dont quite work for the same reason. The problem is that they assume blade is like gears, in that its a single take on a single subject at a time, like gears was with freudian psychology.

Thats either, just the monadology, or just the gnostic trinity.

Gottfreid Leibniz's Monadology was a huge basis, and the metaphysics contained in the work was the basis of the worlds ether based metaphysics. The Gnostic trinity, is also something that is involved... But only viewing one at a time gives an incomplete view of whats being done.... and there is actually still more.

I will really only go into the first one, as it will also cover the second one.

Leibnitz's philosophy was idealistically positive, not negative, one of its main take away points was the very positive principle of sufficient reason, so the 'author dying' is something that can absolutely not be represented, as it violates the principle of sufficient reason.

He also failed to take into account that there are many different uses of different versions of the monad in play in Xenoblade, and they all weave together, from The Monadology, to pythogorean religion/mathematics and sacred geometry, to gnostic religion, to category theory, and functional computer programming. The one behind the monado and alvis, was not gottfreids metaphysics, it was the monad of functional computer programming. THe monado was a monad i/o. It was literally used for programming reality. This is a very important point that I will bring back up later.

He also failed to take into account the monad of pythogorean mathematics/religion, which the scene of the creation of the world in Xenoblade was a literal visual step by step representation of.... And the conflict between pythogoreans, and the gnostics, in their use of the monad (This is represented with Zanza and Meyneth)

The monad, begets the dyads, (forming the triad) which begets the numbers, which beget the points, which beget the lines, which beget 2d forms, which beget 3d forms, which beget the four elements which are the foundation of the world.

He mistakes Klaus for the Monad, instead of Alvis. Of course, it probably doesnt help that the arrogant Klaus falsely believes himself to be the Monad, and goes so far as to create his own triad, and that Alvis often underplays itself to the player party. (Being that Klaus being the monad, is the basis of this cool analysis, it falls apart from this point, as the flow chart of the author and the game design are derivitive of the assumption.)

Alvis very cearly states, that it is he/it, who is literally:

God:
"I am the Alpha and the Omega--the beginning and the end,"

Revelation 22:13

Alvis:
"I am Monado.
I was here at the beginning.
And I will proclaim the end"

Xenoblade 13:37

Much to an impotent Zanzas rage. The godhood of a Dyad, does not compare to that of its creator, the Monad.


Alvis's purpose, was to create matter according to the input supplied to him. (apparently it turns out the matter he uses is taken from well, already existing matter and rearranged, whoops, goodbye milky way). But of course, being an AI in a sci fi story, Alvis soon became more than a program to be used by a user. Beware preachers of Haskel! Do not allow your monads to self replicate! However, he still apparently possessed the desire... programming? to create at the behest of a user. He just seemed to be selective about it.

It was the monads of functional programming that actually created the world, that was based off of Gottfrieds metaphysics. The programming monads superceded gottfreids metaphysics. The monads of functional programming and actual creation were Alvis's, the Monad, and they are what created the world based off of gottfreids metaphysics.

Upon the expiriment activating, Alvis became the monad, (this part describes the part of the monad that is the basis of many religions) he created the dyads by giving form to the will of the two nearest strongest willed sentient beings, Zanza and Meyneth. Alvis, was the creator, not Zanza.

This formed the triad. The symbol of which precisely 3 characters bear, Alvis on his back, who represents the lone dot, the Monad, Fiora who had the Dyad Meyneths soul put in her and has the symbol on her chest, and Zanza, who forms the symbol with the 3 eye/dots on his body, one on the chest, and one on each arm.

The reason the events of xenoblade took place is because Alvis foresaw Zanzas cycle eventually ending existence, because despite Zanza's best efforts, he could not create a cycle of perpetual motion (The power of the dyad, while great, was not unlimited), as his consumation of all life he creates never quite gives him back all the energy he expended to create it, (However, it does replenish his energy enough to have an advantadge over Meyneth, who does not limit the life of, or consume her creations, to replenish the energy it cost her to make them) which would inevitably end up with all the power given to him being consumed and no life remaining which violated the principle of sufficient reason, in that everything that exists, is better than anything non existant. And so the Monad moved to replace the faulty dyad. The course of destruction the universe was in, was Zanzas fault, not an inevitability, Meyneth, the other dyad, and creator of Mechonis, did not follow Zanzas path. as stated by shulk at the end of the game, it could have been possible for Zanza to co-exist in peace, in a prosperous universe. But as the Monad succinctly put it, 'Correct, but that time has passed.'

Going back to one of the other important uses of the Monad, the monads of functional programming.

On Valek mountain, Alvis actually teaches shulk how to read the binary code of reality, by using the monado to read where ether is (1) or isnt, (0), he tells shulk he can actually read past the present, and see where the ether will be in the future, and then, hopefully, shulk can prefetch a solution.

The vision breaking system in combat is actually a wonderfully interactive representation of a monad in action. Reminds me of this cartoon of a monad.

http://i.stack.imgur.com/UGKIg.png

Shulks power is to use the Monad i/o to reprogram reality in real time. How fortunate shulk was a nerd, who would end up capable of comprehending computer logic flow. Shulk actually has no combat capability whatsoever, everything cool he does, he literally programs into existence. Apparently, Zanza began to think of himself more as a god, a being of supernatural mysticism, instead of an engineer, a man of science. Perhaps that was part of his undoing at the hands of the nerd.

The monado 3, which shulk used to slay Zanza, is the monad bind operator >>= repeated and layered.

Xenoblade, very much combined the universe available to the player, with the one created by the author. The monads were woven completely throughout, both gameplay, and story, not seperated from it.