FFCC disapointment
- Thread starter ChronusDark
- Start date
Doomulation
?????????????????????????
For that mario part, I might say it wasn't 'childish,' yet long away from the previous marios. It's pretty sad, really. Mario running around with a water tube on his back? Tsssshhh... (yes, I *DID* play this game.)JevilKnevil said:
For FF:CC. I do own it, but haven't played it really yet. It looks cool, though. As for multiplayer, again this is stupid. Requiring a gba for each player is JUST PLAIN STUPID. I know some people whom I use to play with WHO DOES NOT OWN A GBA. Damn, that's annoying. And to spend $100, take or give, for each gba (for each player)? No thanks!
Doomulation
?????????????????????????
I agree. Big bad faulty on square's part for they were the ones that invented the idea of this.
blizz
New member
no it's actually a really good idea, you're just being narrow minded
You have no idea about game design, if you think that's the fault of the game design, when the game is designed to encourage social (ie, not swearing at some random yank over X-Box Live) co-operation with your friends, and what's more you're being social too (I strange concept to some of you living in your parents basement)
plus if you're designing games and have an idea of squeezing more money out of your audience then why not?
much like twin sticks I have long doubted that many would appreciate it though
You have no idea about game design, if you think that's the fault of the game design, when the game is designed to encourage social (ie, not swearing at some random yank over X-Box Live) co-operation with your friends, and what's more you're being social too (I strange concept to some of you living in your parents basement)
plus if you're designing games and have an idea of squeezing more money out of your audience then why not?
much like twin sticks I have long doubted that many would appreciate it though
Doomulation
?????????????????????????
Now don't get me wrong. The idea of co-operation is wonderful. However, not everyone HAS a gba. Thus, I cannot play with more than myself, which is a shame.
DuDe
Emu64 Staff
No, the whole point is that the only way to play FF:CC right is with friends, and in order to do that each of those friends has to shell out a 100 or so bucks for a GBA. Am I the only one that sees how wrong is this, especially with a game series as popular as Final Fantasy?blizz said:
Doomulation
?????????????????????????
No! I totally agree.DuDe said:
That's just plain wrong =/
I love "different", original ideas for games. I just don't see this as an innovation. It's great if you have a GBA, and shit if you don't. I'm afraid that's not a tradeoff I'd be prepared to make as a developer.blizz said:
I live in a shared house with friends, who are gamers, and we want to play this game. As I've said before, nobody I know has a GBA, and none of us in the house want one. So, no Crystal Chronicals for us.blizz said:
Another vote for no. It's a real shame.DuDe said:
blizz
New member
meh, out of everyone I know who enjoys gaming, only one person doesn't own a GBA, and that's because she uses her boyfriends
The real problem I have with FFCC is that it has the mechanics I feel PSO should have had. PSO had very rigid controls (probably as a method of preventing lag). But FFCC doesn't give the same feeling of control over your character, nor does it draw you into the story as well.
It's the strange lack of involvement the game provides, which as a RPG it should, that makes it average.
The real problem I have with FFCC is that it has the mechanics I feel PSO should have had. PSO had very rigid controls (probably as a method of preventing lag). But FFCC doesn't give the same feeling of control over your character, nor does it draw you into the story as well.
It's the strange lack of involvement the game provides, which as a RPG it should, that makes it average.
DuDe
Emu64 Staff
You know what, I don't even want to pay an extra fucking penny for a piece hardware I don't want, in order to play a game to its fullest. I would've understood if it was a shooting game that required a gun, or a driving game that required a wheel, but for fuck sakes it's a RPG.
Last edited:
So what you're saying is, the game has been has features that require an extra addon that I don't want. What would I do with a GBA? It's got a few good games, but nothing that says "Spend £100 on me!". And hey: if I was going to get one, it would damn well be an SP - what's the point in buying that hardware without any lighting?Tagrineth said:
What gets to me, is that Nintendo are asking me to pay £40+£100 for this game, myself (which is bad enough), but then I'm going to have to convince a friend to spend £40/100 (plus cable), just so we can play 2 player. Fuck that.
Opinion on this is divided clearly into two camps: those who have a GBA already who are saying "come on, stop whining, it's a good game", and those who don't who are saying "why the fuck should I buy something I don't want just to play this game?". I accept it's a good game, now tell me why I should be forced to buy obsolete unwanted hardware just to get the most out of it.
Doomulation
?????????????????????????
On here I completly agree. I was pondering on an option of the OPTIONAL use of a gba. Sure, it would be fun to do real teamwork if they really HAD a gba. If they didn't then well...they could still play, WITHOUT the extra features.
I'm not going to go tell them to get a gba just to play fekking FF:CC. Maybe they can't afford either...all of us aren't rich.
I'm not going to go tell them to get a gba just to play fekking FF:CC. Maybe they can't afford either...all of us aren't rich.