Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Post History
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
WHAT DO YOU LOOK FOR IN GAMES THAT YOU WANT TO PLAY?
Posts
Pages:
1
Strak
1560
Strak
View playlists
CloseKind of a derivation of the recent topic about your favorite aspects of game development, but from the perspective of the player instead of the developer. I'm curious what people like to see in the games they choose to play, and what makes them want to play those games. Couple examples.
I've seen quite a few games around (both here and AAA) that have rave reviews, but frankly in my personal opinion aren't all that great. Don't get me wrong, they're good, but not as good as they're hyped up to be. Not calling anyone out, let's keep it neutral. On the other hand, I've seen games that don't get NEARLY the exposure I think they should, despite being near masterpieces. I've started to wonder why that is. Maybe my tastes are just radically different than the majority of people's? So that's what I want to find out. What are people's tastes?
For myself, I love great gameplay and solid mechanics. That's where the fun is for me. The narrative helps tie everything together and keep it interesting, but in my opinion, if the gameplay is dry or slow or frustrating, no narrative can save that for me. Besides which, if I've played a story driven game and finished it, then I don't have a lot of reason to play it again. I've seen this movie, I've read this book. But if there's a solid gameplay loop with some great mechanics, yeah, I can dig into that over and over again, and try new ways to optimize those mechanics.
Unpopular opinion incoming: Metroid Other M was a good game. The narrative sucked. The characters were awful. There were plot holes and loose ends everywhere. The cutscenes were long. But. The gameplay was solid. It took the classic 2D side scroller Metroid games and brought it into a 3D platformer FPS world in a way that worked surprisingly well. The mechanics blended well, and it just felt good to best enemies when you're overpowered as hell. Even the exploration was solid. Plus, they brought back a bunch of classic bosses like Nightmare and Mother Brain, which was a pretty neat take. Although the narrative sucked, I could skip the dialogue and cutscenes and just cut to the fast paced shooter action I was looking for. It was actually replayable in that sense, if you just ignored the story.
On the other side is a game like Villnoire. I love Villnoire. The gameplay is fairly simple, and not terribly replayable. But the narrative is excellent. The characters are gripping and engaging. The story is beautiful. But... I kind of have a hard time replaying it. Not because I don't enjoy it. I enjoy it more than most games. But... I've seen this show before. There's nothing really new to see. The gameplay doesn't really change from one playthrough to another. It's the kind of game I can really only play again once every couple years at best. Is it a masterpiece? Heck yeah, I would put it in my list of games I mentioned before that don't receive enough recognition. But honestly, it's not what I typically look for in a game, simply because I know it'll be a short lived experience. A beautiful, incomparable experience, sure, but a very very temporary one.
All that is to say I'm typically drawn more to games with excellent mechanics and gameplay over narrative, although I definitely see the value in and appreciate both. How about you? What do you look for in games?
I've seen quite a few games around (both here and AAA) that have rave reviews, but frankly in my personal opinion aren't all that great. Don't get me wrong, they're good, but not as good as they're hyped up to be. Not calling anyone out, let's keep it neutral. On the other hand, I've seen games that don't get NEARLY the exposure I think they should, despite being near masterpieces. I've started to wonder why that is. Maybe my tastes are just radically different than the majority of people's? So that's what I want to find out. What are people's tastes?
For myself, I love great gameplay and solid mechanics. That's where the fun is for me. The narrative helps tie everything together and keep it interesting, but in my opinion, if the gameplay is dry or slow or frustrating, no narrative can save that for me. Besides which, if I've played a story driven game and finished it, then I don't have a lot of reason to play it again. I've seen this movie, I've read this book. But if there's a solid gameplay loop with some great mechanics, yeah, I can dig into that over and over again, and try new ways to optimize those mechanics.
Unpopular opinion incoming: Metroid Other M was a good game. The narrative sucked. The characters were awful. There were plot holes and loose ends everywhere. The cutscenes were long. But. The gameplay was solid. It took the classic 2D side scroller Metroid games and brought it into a 3D platformer FPS world in a way that worked surprisingly well. The mechanics blended well, and it just felt good to best enemies when you're overpowered as hell. Even the exploration was solid. Plus, they brought back a bunch of classic bosses like Nightmare and Mother Brain, which was a pretty neat take. Although the narrative sucked, I could skip the dialogue and cutscenes and just cut to the fast paced shooter action I was looking for. It was actually replayable in that sense, if you just ignored the story.
On the other side is a game like Villnoire. I love Villnoire. The gameplay is fairly simple, and not terribly replayable. But the narrative is excellent. The characters are gripping and engaging. The story is beautiful. But... I kind of have a hard time replaying it. Not because I don't enjoy it. I enjoy it more than most games. But... I've seen this show before. There's nothing really new to see. The gameplay doesn't really change from one playthrough to another. It's the kind of game I can really only play again once every couple years at best. Is it a masterpiece? Heck yeah, I would put it in my list of games I mentioned before that don't receive enough recognition. But honestly, it's not what I typically look for in a game, simply because I know it'll be a short lived experience. A beautiful, incomparable experience, sure, but a very very temporary one.
All that is to say I'm typically drawn more to games with excellent mechanics and gameplay over narrative, although I definitely see the value in and appreciate both. How about you? What do you look for in games?
Shinan
4314
I like turn based tactics. If a (tactical) game is shown to me to have suppressive fire and actual usable smoke grenades I'm also immediately more interested.
If there's a slightly grander scale (for example there's a strategic overlay with or without turn based tactics attached) I also like logistics. Often somewhat simplified logistics to be sure, but I like the idea of having to resupply and keep track of rations and all that good shit.
And sometimes I just like Rocket League.
If there's a slightly grander scale (for example there's a strategic overlay with or without turn based tactics attached) I also like logistics. Often somewhat simplified logistics to be sure, but I like the idea of having to resupply and keep track of rations and all that good shit.
And sometimes I just like Rocket League.
Darken
3952
I don't know really. I feel like most games aren't engaging enough for me to really see it to the end but it might not always be their fault due to my weird brain. I prefer narrative in games purely because there's more chances of things to latch onto, but also I think if it's also setpiece driven I tend to look forward to what's next. I can't stand roguelikes or puzzle games with just stacks of levels to play because I just don't care after awhile. I need more than just a stack of filler. One reason I think I just never complete games (especially old ones) is that they tend to be REALLY repetitive just to hit some sort of hour quota. But I was really sucked into games like Half Life and Metal Gear Solid and get kinda dissapointed when an intriguing game just has 100 maze dungeons for various dev reasons and expectations.
That said I really like fighting games like Street Fighter or Tekken, do not care for their 5/10 storylines but I think the 1v1 gameplay against a human opponent leads to endless depth. There's so many different personalities when running into people online, that I just never get bored of those games. Idk I guess a human with habits to solve and predict is just more interesting than procedurally generated levels. So they sort of replaced a need for a story hook or whatever.
I think when seeking a game out I look for a strange or interesting vibe. I'm in my 30s so I kind of just accepted that not every other game I find is going to blow me away, been there done that. Yet if there's something weird or uncanny about it, games by Suda51, Yoko Taro, SWERY, Kenji Eno, Love-de-Lic etc. or some Slavjank games. Then the gameplay or story doesn't even have to be good per say, but there's just something to them that I can't describe that keeps me engaged. You can probably find some stuff like that just browsing through itch io or some off beat RPG Maker game, but there's also an allure to finding those types of games on PS1 or PS2 that adds to it. Again can't explain it, a mixture of nostalgia and mystery I guess.
I also think with some older games if they don't quite follow game design coventions and QoL stuff and are just really really messy, it tends to lead to a more interesting game. A lot of games now are really design by commitee and it's hard to get stuck on them (and arguably better in some ways) but it leads to some really mundane stuff. If I know what's around the corner then what's the point of going around it? System Shock 1 remake reminds me how messy 90s games tend to be, they left most of the level design and gameplay unchanged save for a few updated controls/interface. The result is kind of a backtracky nightmare maze of level design that can be all over the place. Yet I kinda like it?
But yeah idk, a game that strikes a balance between being interesting and good but also very messy and unpredictable. Which is very hard to describe exactly if you interoggated me on what is "interesting" or what is "messy" but that's my 2 cents.
That said I really like fighting games like Street Fighter or Tekken, do not care for their 5/10 storylines but I think the 1v1 gameplay against a human opponent leads to endless depth. There's so many different personalities when running into people online, that I just never get bored of those games. Idk I guess a human with habits to solve and predict is just more interesting than procedurally generated levels. So they sort of replaced a need for a story hook or whatever.
I think when seeking a game out I look for a strange or interesting vibe. I'm in my 30s so I kind of just accepted that not every other game I find is going to blow me away, been there done that. Yet if there's something weird or uncanny about it, games by Suda51, Yoko Taro, SWERY, Kenji Eno, Love-de-Lic etc. or some Slavjank games. Then the gameplay or story doesn't even have to be good per say, but there's just something to them that I can't describe that keeps me engaged. You can probably find some stuff like that just browsing through itch io or some off beat RPG Maker game, but there's also an allure to finding those types of games on PS1 or PS2 that adds to it. Again can't explain it, a mixture of nostalgia and mystery I guess.
I also think with some older games if they don't quite follow game design coventions and QoL stuff and are just really really messy, it tends to lead to a more interesting game. A lot of games now are really design by commitee and it's hard to get stuck on them (and arguably better in some ways) but it leads to some really mundane stuff. If I know what's around the corner then what's the point of going around it? System Shock 1 remake reminds me how messy 90s games tend to be, they left most of the level design and gameplay unchanged save for a few updated controls/interface. The result is kind of a backtracky nightmare maze of level design that can be all over the place. Yet I kinda like it?
But yeah idk, a game that strikes a balance between being interesting and good but also very messy and unpredictable. Which is very hard to describe exactly if you interoggated me on what is "interesting" or what is "messy" but that's my 2 cents.
I love your take on Metroid another M. I haven't played it, but its always nice to see some love spread around for media that's panned so heavily.
Anyway, this is weird and kinda specific, but i love the personality of a narrative. The plot itself is important, but the characterization of the narrative is what really hooks me. How do i explain this? Sorta like, is the narrative funnier or more serious leaning? Do they focus more on word building/lore or character? Is the plot active or passive? Do they make time for light/sincere moments? That sort of thing. A defined personality it what makes a game for me. That's why I like Mother 1 so much, just the perfect tone and personality for me.
Anyway, this is weird and kinda specific, but i love the personality of a narrative. The plot itself is important, but the characterization of the narrative is what really hooks me. How do i explain this? Sorta like, is the narrative funnier or more serious leaning? Do they focus more on word building/lore or character? Is the plot active or passive? Do they make time for light/sincere moments? That sort of thing. A defined personality it what makes a game for me. That's why I like Mother 1 so much, just the perfect tone and personality for me.
When it comes to 4X games, I've played Endless Legend and Endless Space, and that's about my level of complexity when it comes to those kinds of games. However, my go-to for this genre is more likely going to be Master of Orion 2 - Battle at Antares.
Strategy/tactics, I think hands down, is going to be a Heroes of Might and Magic game. I largely prefer 2, but, 3 is certainly serviceable.
Action/adventure games are when things might get a little muddy. Like, I think I'm tending more towards "Musou" games (ie: Dynasty Warriors, or games like it) lately? I dunno. There is something about being able to take out sometimes literally thousands of mooks without batting an eye. I suppose it might be a "power fantasy" thing.
Role-playing games are probably the murkiest for me to understand what makes me gravitate toward one title over another. Tales of Arise was my latest RPG, and my basis for wanting it was to see what the hell was going on with the Tales series. Like, I emulated a translated SNES ROM of Tales of Phantasis back in the day, and dipped into the franchise again with the PS3 port of Tales of Symphonia. You could probably say the same thing about Final Fantasy 7 Remake; I wanted to know what was staying, and what was changing.
So, if I were to use that logic, the Resident Evil remakes that have been popping out of late (particularly RE4) would be something I could have interest in. Except... I don't? I dunno, I just think I would have more fun with the originals, and you know, having the ability to use CodeBreaker to make it less "survivor horror" to maybe just "horror". So sue me.
*Edit: I should be happier that Konami is remaking/remastering Suikoden and Suikoden 2, and putting them into a bundle for Steam. Those are some kick-ass games, and releasing them as a bundle makes a lot of marketing sense with the data transfer those games had on the PS1. However, like Capcom's remakes of the Resident Evil series, I just can't bring myself to actually want to get it for myself. I'd rather just play the PS1 originals, have easier access to "Stat Stones" by virtue of CodeBreaker use, and make the games just a little easier.
Strategy/tactics, I think hands down, is going to be a Heroes of Might and Magic game. I largely prefer 2, but, 3 is certainly serviceable.
Action/adventure games are when things might get a little muddy. Like, I think I'm tending more towards "Musou" games (ie: Dynasty Warriors, or games like it) lately? I dunno. There is something about being able to take out sometimes literally thousands of mooks without batting an eye. I suppose it might be a "power fantasy" thing.
Role-playing games are probably the murkiest for me to understand what makes me gravitate toward one title over another. Tales of Arise was my latest RPG, and my basis for wanting it was to see what the hell was going on with the Tales series. Like, I emulated a translated SNES ROM of Tales of Phantasis back in the day, and dipped into the franchise again with the PS3 port of Tales of Symphonia. You could probably say the same thing about Final Fantasy 7 Remake; I wanted to know what was staying, and what was changing.
So, if I were to use that logic, the Resident Evil remakes that have been popping out of late (particularly RE4) would be something I could have interest in. Except... I don't? I dunno, I just think I would have more fun with the originals, and you know, having the ability to use CodeBreaker to make it less "survivor horror" to maybe just "horror". So sue me.
*Edit: I should be happier that Konami is remaking/remastering Suikoden and Suikoden 2, and putting them into a bundle for Steam. Those are some kick-ass games, and releasing them as a bundle makes a lot of marketing sense with the data transfer those games had on the PS1. However, like Capcom's remakes of the Resident Evil series, I just can't bring myself to actually want to get it for myself. I'd rather just play the PS1 originals, have easier access to "Stat Stones" by virtue of CodeBreaker use, and make the games just a little easier.
Red_Nova
Sir Redd of Novus: He who made Prayer of the Faithless that one time, and that was pretty dang rad! :D
9192
While I am typically a narrative over gameplay kind of guy, I tend to be drawn towards games that enable some form of player expression. Whether that be via the story in a more narrative driven game or through gameplay, I want to be able to leave a mark on a game that can be different from the next player. If the story is linear and the gameplay doesn't invoke at least some kind of creativity, then I can get bored pretty quickly.
From a story perspective, player expression doesn't come just in the form of dialogue trees. It can be like choosing who to hang out with in a Persona game, or deciding who to marry in Story of Seasons/Rune Factory, or even hidden choices like how Silent Hill 2 handles endings. You can still have a linear story with only one ending while allowing various forms of expression in the moment-to-moment gameplay, and that's enough for me to stay engaged even if the gameplay is uninspired.
Gameplay expression is also important. Even linear narrative games like the Tales series achieve player expression because not only are there several party members with unique playstyles and move sets, but strong system mechanics like Vesperia's Overlimit or Arise's Boost Attack can let you take approaches to combat that are limited only by your creativity. Devil May Cry 5 is one of my favorite action games because of its massive list of weapons and skills that can be employed to vary up combos and look cool doing it. "Going for style" is not only possible, it's encouraged. No two people will play DMC5 the same way, and it's amazing because of it.
But even linear stories with limited gameplay tools can still leave room for expression as long as the system mechanics allow for more decision-making. This video by Leon Massey does a better job of explaining it than myself. You don't have to enjoy fighting games to understand the points being made in this video:
TL;DR: Resources with multiple uses allow for smart decision making and player expression.
From a story perspective, player expression doesn't come just in the form of dialogue trees. It can be like choosing who to hang out with in a Persona game, or deciding who to marry in Story of Seasons/Rune Factory, or even hidden choices like how Silent Hill 2 handles endings. You can still have a linear story with only one ending while allowing various forms of expression in the moment-to-moment gameplay, and that's enough for me to stay engaged even if the gameplay is uninspired.
Gameplay expression is also important. Even linear narrative games like the Tales series achieve player expression because not only are there several party members with unique playstyles and move sets, but strong system mechanics like Vesperia's Overlimit or Arise's Boost Attack can let you take approaches to combat that are limited only by your creativity. Devil May Cry 5 is one of my favorite action games because of its massive list of weapons and skills that can be employed to vary up combos and look cool doing it. "Going for style" is not only possible, it's encouraged. No two people will play DMC5 the same way, and it's amazing because of it.
But even linear stories with limited gameplay tools can still leave room for expression as long as the system mechanics allow for more decision-making. This video by Leon Massey does a better job of explaining it than myself. You don't have to enjoy fighting games to understand the points being made in this video:
TL;DR: Resources with multiple uses allow for smart decision making and player expression.
aquatorrent
5697
it depends on whatever my mood is in, but i usually look either narrative or gameplay. i especially enjoy games that can pull myself in to whatever universe the game is created or games that can get my blood or brain pumping on the gameplay part.
tbh the most common requirement for games for me today is "Was it originally released in the 1990s?"
For me, how I perceive games depends on the genre. The moment I look at an FPS game, I tend to check whether it has good gameplay. If it's an RPG, narrative. Puzzles, how much the creator decided that he's the only smart person in the world. Whatever comes to mind. Originally, I would say I'd prefer saying something within the lines of 'gameplay' over 'narrative' but even that's been thrown out of the dump because of a few games. Hell, even the notion of 'criteria' gets thrown around at times.
Aveyond should be a game I would've forgotten if not for nostalgia purposes. It is actually the first RPG Maker game that I've played and I kind of got hooked into it. Looking back, it's definitely a story I'd give on a low bar but my child brain back then was wired differently.
On the other side of the spectrum, ULTRAKILL. ULTRAKILL is the one game that prioritizes gameplay above all yet doesn't compromise on how much it can tell a story through the background. After playing the game, it felt like I got more out of it than any other games I've played it (and I rank Final Fantasy Tactics that high, mind you). And even with those standards, I still play old games that I've already played. And those games never bored me still.
And it gets even worse because I never get stuck to a specific genre. Lo and behold, I've gone through the journey of playing heart-pounding titles like Amnesia and then suddenly... switching to games like Mai's Sweet Buns? Discover my surprise when I've suddenly developed an addiction to romantic light novels. Wonder where that came from.
It's definitely an odd experience for me, but all I could pretty much say is that as long as I see potential in a game, then I'd definitely play it. Doesn't matter what genre. If you get me hooked in some way or form (though I do get easily hooked by good music, dear lord Magenta Horizon), then consider me a happy gamer.
tl;dr I should be the last person you should ask for game suggestions. I will just bombard you with titles.
Aveyond should be a game I would've forgotten if not for nostalgia purposes. It is actually the first RPG Maker game that I've played and I kind of got hooked into it. Looking back, it's definitely a story I'd give on a low bar but my child brain back then was wired differently.
On the other side of the spectrum, ULTRAKILL. ULTRAKILL is the one game that prioritizes gameplay above all yet doesn't compromise on how much it can tell a story through the background. After playing the game, it felt like I got more out of it than any other games I've played it (and I rank Final Fantasy Tactics that high, mind you). And even with those standards, I still play old games that I've already played. And those games never bored me still.
And it gets even worse because I never get stuck to a specific genre. Lo and behold, I've gone through the journey of playing heart-pounding titles like Amnesia and then suddenly... switching to games like Mai's Sweet Buns? Discover my surprise when I've suddenly developed an addiction to romantic light novels. Wonder where that came from.
It's definitely an odd experience for me, but all I could pretty much say is that as long as I see potential in a game, then I'd definitely play it. Doesn't matter what genre. If you get me hooked in some way or form (though I do get easily hooked by good music, dear lord Magenta Horizon), then consider me a happy gamer.
tl;dr I should be the last person you should ask for game suggestions. I will just bombard you with titles.
Sidewinder
2880
Mostly I just buy a lot of retro stuff. Not a huge fan of modern graphics or mechanics.
I guess what I tend to look for is stuff with a high degree of player agency, but also a game that isn't open world.
I guess what I tend to look for is stuff with a high degree of player agency, but also a game that isn't open world.
Lokishade
50
I look mostly for novel ideas.
Before the merger, Enix used to publish many such games. Valkyrie Profile, in my opinion a rough gem, used platforming elements for dungeon exploration and combined real-time combos with classic turn based combat. It felt like it had the ambition of making you play the war in Asgard on top of it all but had to cut it due to the game being large enough. Oh, what could have been.
The fact that you recruited your warriors after their death meant you were witnessing the most tragic and desperate moment of their life. And then you swooped in to grant them passage to the afterlife. Very powerful. Sadly, the sequel failed to understand that this is the place where they struck gold. Instead, you just picked your warriors up like flowers and what could have been a powerful bonding experience is now reduced to an easily overlooked footnote in the status screen.
Star Ocean used real-time combat mechanics with multiple party members. In it, you could trigger some attacks and simply move out of the way to dodge them, like a fire breath. Very neat. Imagine my surprise when I found out they tried this on the SuperFamicom 3 years prior. My gripe was that, even though it had a futuristic setting, you were always stuck using medieval weaponry due to being catapulted in worlds without technological advancement. Don't present a novel idea only to backpedal on it, dammit. This is why my favorite Star Ocean 2 character is Opera, simply becaues she wields a huge a** multifunction futuristic rifle, and Precis because of all the gadgets she throws at the enemy. Nevermind that they are 2 of the 3 most annoying voiceovers of the game, I'm here for the futuristic concept.
Before the merger, Enix used to publish many such games. Valkyrie Profile, in my opinion a rough gem, used platforming elements for dungeon exploration and combined real-time combos with classic turn based combat. It felt like it had the ambition of making you play the war in Asgard on top of it all but had to cut it due to the game being large enough. Oh, what could have been.
The fact that you recruited your warriors after their death meant you were witnessing the most tragic and desperate moment of their life. And then you swooped in to grant them passage to the afterlife. Very powerful. Sadly, the sequel failed to understand that this is the place where they struck gold. Instead, you just picked your warriors up like flowers and what could have been a powerful bonding experience is now reduced to an easily overlooked footnote in the status screen.
Star Ocean used real-time combat mechanics with multiple party members. In it, you could trigger some attacks and simply move out of the way to dodge them, like a fire breath. Very neat. Imagine my surprise when I found out they tried this on the SuperFamicom 3 years prior. My gripe was that, even though it had a futuristic setting, you were always stuck using medieval weaponry due to being catapulted in worlds without technological advancement. Don't present a novel idea only to backpedal on it, dammit. This is why my favorite Star Ocean 2 character is Opera, simply becaues she wields a huge a** multifunction futuristic rifle, and Precis because of all the gadgets she throws at the enemy. Nevermind that they are 2 of the 3 most annoying voiceovers of the game, I'm here for the futuristic concept.
My favorite games are the type of games that allow you to create intricate builds to handle whatever situation the game throws at you. Some examples include Hades, almost any class-based RPG like Bravely Default or Octopath, and most Megaten games. I also prefer RPGs like most people here, but I also like action RPGs especially of the action platformer variety. Like the GBA/DS Castlevania games for example.
What will absolutely turn me off of a game is one of two things: 1, poor controls/game feel and 2: slow animations/movement speed. In an RPG, the faster and snappier the animations, the better. I revile how overly long a lot of the animations and transitions for a lot of PS1 RPGs are. Like, a good 25% of your playtime is watching battle animations or transitions and that's just pure suffering in my book. Those games like FFVII, FFIX or Chrono Cross are completely unplayable for me without a speed up option in an emulator or port due everything being so slow. Even some PS2 games suffer from this like FFXII. Great game, but I just have no idea why everything wasn't sped up by at least 1.5x, preferably 1.75x. I played the HD version twice on both PS4 and Switch and both times I played the entire game at 2x speed (4x speed when grinding or fighting Yeizmat) and it was fine, just a tad bit too fast.
More games need to be like more recent Atlus games where the animations are pretty and detailed, but also quick, snappy, and stylish. Heck, after 3 games of painfully slow animations, Xenosaga 3 had the fastest battle transitions in any RPG ever that isn't instant (0.25 seconds!) and lightning fast animations that made the game actually playable compared to the last three xeno games, but especially Xenosaga 2. In the Xenoblade games everything was done in real time so obviously everything was instant.
What will absolutely turn me off of a game is one of two things: 1, poor controls/game feel and 2: slow animations/movement speed. In an RPG, the faster and snappier the animations, the better. I revile how overly long a lot of the animations and transitions for a lot of PS1 RPGs are. Like, a good 25% of your playtime is watching battle animations or transitions and that's just pure suffering in my book. Those games like FFVII, FFIX or Chrono Cross are completely unplayable for me without a speed up option in an emulator or port due everything being so slow. Even some PS2 games suffer from this like FFXII. Great game, but I just have no idea why everything wasn't sped up by at least 1.5x, preferably 1.75x. I played the HD version twice on both PS4 and Switch and both times I played the entire game at 2x speed (4x speed when grinding or fighting Yeizmat) and it was fine, just a tad bit too fast.
More games need to be like more recent Atlus games where the animations are pretty and detailed, but also quick, snappy, and stylish. Heck, after 3 games of painfully slow animations, Xenosaga 3 had the fastest battle transitions in any RPG ever that isn't instant (0.25 seconds!) and lightning fast animations that made the game actually playable compared to the last three xeno games, but especially Xenosaga 2. In the Xenoblade games everything was done in real time so obviously everything was instant.
Pages:
1
