|
|
Post by gamezone on Apr 25, 2013 19:48:54 GMT -5
I have always wondered about Uniracers. Road Runner's Death Valley Ralley and Speedy Gonzales for SNES really shows what speed could be achieved on the system. If you are not into cartoons then it probably is not very enjoyable. Still they are amazing games to look at.
|
|
|
|
Post by wyldephang on Apr 27, 2013 22:29:05 GMT -5
I've been squeezing in a few hours of Shining Force between assignments. Nothing in terms of the core gameplay changes between the beginning and end; battles are still a series of tactical encounters. In the later stages, you'll have to make decisions on party movement based on the terrain. On mountainous regions, for example, the mobility of the characters is limited. Some characters are able to fly over the terrain, however, and some navigate the rough patches better than others. Enemy encounters become more difficult as mages are now able to target multiple characters at once, forcing you to move in staggered patterns. And now, I'm coming across enemies with physical resistance. Recently, I've been experimenting with one of the unique aspects of the game: character promotions. After reaching level 10, a character is able to promote to the next tier, opening up new weapons and equipment. It makes the game more dynamic. Overall, I'm enjoying Shining Force, and looking forward to progressing even further.
|
|
|
|
Post by gamezone on Apr 29, 2013 5:48:22 GMT -5
I had always read that Shining Force was a very expansive game. Sounds by your descriptions Wyldephang, that it is a game I should have taken more serious. I really enjoyed Shining in the Darkness and looked forward to Shining Force's release.
Only thing I can think of why it stayed under my gaming radar was the release of the Sega CD. Games like Kings Bounty and Starflight were taking a lot of my time back then as well.
Shining Force CD also somehow slipped by me. So many games so little time.
|
|
|
|
Post by VectorX on Apr 29, 2013 9:05:45 GMT -5
^Too bad I didn't know you back then, I would've sold you my copy of it ;D I just went through it/the extra battle due to having the Backup RAM cart, recorded some of the music, and got rid of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by gamezone on Apr 30, 2013 7:36:38 GMT -5
So VectorX, I should avoid the game?
|
|
|
|
Post by VectorX on Apr 30, 2013 12:18:57 GMT -5
It depends. I saw good reviews of it back in the day, but I didn't agree, as going from battle to battle to battle was a bit much to me, even though it's turn-based! I give it a 6 out of 10, others have rated it higher.
As long as you don't pay a lot for it and you like RPGs, it's probably still ok to get.
|
|
|
|
Post by wyldephang on May 1, 2013 3:18:21 GMT -5
Well, I don't have any experience with the Sega CD, so I can't offer any testimony to Shining Force CD. I can say that Shining Force 1 has been very rewarding to play and I try to sneak in one or two battles a day if schoolwork permits. I remember saying that, in the beginning, I thought I'd acquire a small party. Most RPGs (though there are exceptions) tend to focus on a small cast of playable characters, giving the player a chance to develop the side-quests of his party without taking away too much time from the main quest. In Shining Force 1, this simply wouldn't be possible as there are 30 characters to choose from, and up to 11 of them can be active members of your party. It's a case of quantity over quality, and as such, the most depth you'll get out of your party is the short introduction they make when joining the party--"Hi, I want to help you fight evil!"--or the snippets of text they're scripted to say while resting in the headquarters--"C'mon! Let me fight," or something like that. The main storyline has been average and intriguing enough, but the battles are the most fun. And since there are 30 characters in total, there should be a lot of replay value, as you can return to the game and recruit different members into your battle party.
My current party consists of one healer, two mages, and an archer, with the rest of the spots being filled by melee characters. I've been promoting (upgrading) my stronger characters, too, to prepare them for the upcoming battles; after the promotion, their stats slump a bit, but as they continue to level up, their stats will increase and make up for the deficit and then some. I'm seeing a lot of close-quarters combat, so it's imperative for me to track the stats of my party between battles, for if I send a weak character to the front, he or she could be beaten down in an instant. It's a surprisingly dynamic game. Here I am nearing the end of it and I still haven't learned everything there is to know about strategy.
|
|
|
|
Post by gamezone on May 1, 2013 5:55:40 GMT -5
Sounds like your getting your moneys worth out of Shining Force. Wyldephang, I was curious what your thoughts are between SEGA and SNES RPG's so far? How they compare against each other?
SNES fans always tend to feel that SEGA RPGs can not compare. So any thoughts you want to share would be appreciated.
|
|
|
|
Post by VectorX on May 1, 2013 9:12:03 GMT -5
In Shining Force 1, this simply wouldn't be possible as there are 30 characters to choose from, and up to 11 of them can be active members of your party. Yep, and if I remember correctly, there's more (or maybe just some different ones) in S. Force 2. One of them flies, so terrain has nothing on him, he can go anywhere. It's a case of quantity over quality, Yep, as some characters aren't worth a damn, even when leveling up! They're best left where you found them (think it was SF 2 where there were hidden characters that pop up here and there, but that might have started with the first S. Force). And since there are 30 characters in total, there should be a lot of replay value, as you can return to the game and recruit different members into your battle party. I hadn't thought of it that way, but then I only had one or two rentals with mine years ago, so I just pretty much played it through and that was it. |
|
|
|
Post by wyldephang on May 1, 2013 19:03:47 GMT -5
I hadn't thought of it that way, but then I only had one or two rentals with mine years ago, so I just pretty much played it through and that was it. To clarify, I won't be revisiting this one right away. After the semester ends, I have a list of Super Nintendo RPGs waiting to be played and replayed. I have some unfinished business with a couple PlayStation RPGs, too. And I've been intending to read at least one novel (for pleasure) this summer to release the strain of academic reading. So, Shining Force will have to wait. Luckily, it's not a game that demands a playthrough in one sitting. Since the chapters are broken up into battles, and the player has the ability to save between fights, it could easily be one of those "pick up and play" games. Sounds like your getting your moneys worth out of Shining Force. Wyldephang, I was curious what your thoughts are between SEGA and SNES RPG's so far? How they compare against each other? SNES fans always tend to feel that SEGA RPGs can not compare. So any thoughts you want to share would be appreciated. Let me start by saying that the Genesis RPGs stand up well to their SNES counterparts, although the latter games belong to much broader library. But as I switch between the two consoles, I realize that they were built for different purposes. The SNES handles story-driven adventure and RPG games more capably because its 32,000-plus color palette allows for vivid, detailed graphics, and its 8-channel sound sampling lends itself to brilliant orchestral soundtracks. Listen to this tune from Final Fantasy III for an example of the SNES hardware emulating a symphonic ensemble. Now, listen to the real-life counterpart. It's not identical, but it's pretty close, and it's definitely the nearest we could get to "real life" with 16-bit technology The Genesis, with its faster processor, was built for speed and action. I think Sega ackowledged the success of their arcade games and wanted to make sure that the home ports would run just as smoothly. So, the Genesis maintains a stable frame rate in games like Thunder Force and Streets of Rage 2 where there a lot of processes running at once, which tends to overtax the SNES CPU and cause slowdown. With an RPG, though, the emphasis is on telling a story; it's not a genre that inherently pushes processing power to its limits, but it does demand much in the areas of graphics and sound, where the SNES triumphs for all the reasons mentioned above. So, for a gamer who likes the RPG genre, there's simply more on the SNES to enjoy. Some of the greatest RPGs have been released on the console: Final Fantasy II and III (now known as FFIV and FFVI); Earthbound; Secret of Mana; Super Mario RPG; Illusion of Gaia; Chrono Trigger; Breath of Fire II; and even some Japanese RPGs that didn't get a U.S. localization, like Dragon Quest VI, Saiken Densetsu 3, Terranigma, and Final Fantasy V. In my opinion, along with the PC and PlayStation, the SNES ruled the golden age of RPGs. |
|
|
|
Post by gamezone on May 2, 2013 6:13:47 GMT -5
Thanks, Wyldephang. That is a fair view of both systems.
I bought both, because back when they came out, Nintendo still had the licensing lock with game developers. So both systems had games that were different enough, that buying both consoles made sense.
SEGA went after computer hits to augment their Genesis library. VectorX and myself have discussed Starflight a few times. Starflight is a great space themed game and the SNES could have handled the game fine. I have wondered if it was not released because of Sega's early contract deal with Electronic Arts.
Nintendo had the 8bit library to feed from. They could expand on Zelda and other franchises while still keeping the fan base happy. I bought the NES more for sports and platform games. So, when given the choice of RPGs in the 16bit era, SEGA had more to offer in my view.
Over the years, I have purchased and sold many RPGs for both systems. Earthbound, Phantasy Star III, Secret of Mana, Shining Force II, Y's are gone and hopefully being played by someone. The thought was, why keep them if they might never be played.
|
|
|
|
Post by VectorX on May 2, 2013 10:15:14 GMT -5
VectorX and myself have discussed Starflight a few times. Starflight is a great space themed game and the SNES could have handled the game fine. Yep, Starflight is something that would keep Wyldephang occupied for quite some time! |
|
|
|
Post by wyldephang on Jul 25, 2013 1:31:01 GMT -5
I know there is another active "now playing" thread on the forum, but I've been keeping my more detailed write-ups in this thread, and I have another one to contribute. Quickly, as an aside, I looked into your recommendation, Starflight, and it appears to be a very interesting game! Ambitious for the time, too, as the galaxy map offers a good amount of exploration for the player. I can see why some would make modern-day comparisons to Mass Effect, another game that features space navigation. I took a break from Shining Force. I arrived at the last battle, but I need to level up some of my characters before I try to tackle the final boss. For the time being, I decided to divert my attention to a different game. One possibility was Shining in the Darkness, which I purchased from a local game store. But as I mentioned earlier in this thread, I've got a lot of Super Nintendo games piling up on the bookshelf and I feel it's time for me to make a dent in that area of my collection. So, I've been playing Final Fantasy Mystic Quest on the SNES. Mystic Quest is a traditional turn-based RPG with a conventional battle system. What makes the game unique to the series are its simplified interface and reduced difficulty, which were incentives to draw casual gamers to the relatively esoteric RPG genre. The experiment failed to attract the attention of casual gamers, though, and was censured by longtime fans of the genre. Worse yet, time hasn't treated this game especially well; if it was critically panned in 1992, then it has since been doubly overshadowed by games like Final Fantasy VII and Xenogears. Mystic Quest sits within a game genre that is characterized by exceptional storytelling and breathtaking visuals. The standard has been set high, and against the better games in its class, Mystic Quest simply doesn't hold up. Nonetheless, there are some welcome additions to the game. For instance, I thought the ability to switch weapons on the go (with the shoulder buttons) was a great idea. And to Square's credit, the game does accomplish the general goal of being a simplified role-playing game. So, in spite of its flaws, I'll continue to play through it and report back with my concluding thoughts.  |
|
|
|
Post by VectorX on Jul 25, 2013 8:11:46 GMT -5
For instance, I thought the ability to switch weapons on the go (with the shoulder buttons) was a great idea. Really; I'm no RPG expert, but I've never heard of a game allowing that before. |
|
|
|
Post by wyldephang on Jul 25, 2013 13:57:17 GMT -5
For instance, I thought the ability to switch weapons on the go (with the shoulder buttons) was a great idea. Really; I'm no RPG expert, but I've never heard of a game allowing that before. Yes, it's not seen very often in the genre because equipment management is typically handled in the menus. But the Mystic Quest menu system has been pared down to the absolute necessities, and as a result, weapon switching is mapped to the L and R buttons. Some of the game's puzzles (if we use the term liberally) require a specific weapon to solve, and the player can interact with his environment if the right weapon is equipped--axes chop down trees, bombs blow open cracks in the wall. Also, many enemies have affinities and weaknesses to certain weapons, making it prudent to change equipment in the midst of battle. It's an interesting system; it works well. |
|
