General Games Discussion

https://www.metacritic.com/game/metaphor-refantazio/

From the makers of the Persona series. Early reviews have rated it 94. Might become the highest rated game of the year

Pedram wrote:

Never too late huh

Well a bit late in this case

Warrior wrote:

Pedram wrote:

Never too late huh

Well a bit late in this case

BUT WHY?

Thimmy wrote:https://www.metacritic.com/game/metaphor-refantazio/

From the makers of the Persona series. Early reviews have rated it 94. Might become the highest rated game of the year

Means absolutely nothing.

Harmonica wrote:

Thimmy wrote:https://www.metacritic.com/game/metaphor-refantazio/

From the makers of the Persona series. Early reviews have rated it 94. Might become the highest rated game of the year

Means absolutely nothing.

Just like the MLS

Thimmy wrote:https://www.metacritic.com/game/metaphor-refantazio/

From the makers of the Persona series. Early reviews have rated it 94. Might become the highest rated game of the year

enjoyable game, took me 70 hours, did most of the content, I think I prefer the story and characters to Persona 5, but Persona 5 has better dungeons

Firenze wrote:

Thimmy wrote:https://www.metacritic.com/game/metaphor-refantazio/

From the makers of the Persona series. Early reviews have rated it 94. Might become the highest rated game of the year

enjoyable game, took me 70 hours, did most of the content, I think I prefer the story and characters to Persona 5, but Persona 5 has better dungeons

I'm right at the end of the game after about 80-90 hours. A few of those hours were due to the Playstation running the game on standby while I wasn't around. I've enjoyed the game. I agree with you regarding the story and characters compared to Persona 5.

As for the dungeons, I feel like I've been quite indifferent towards most of them in this game. They were much grander and distinctive from each other in Persona 5. Most of the dungeons in Metaphor look like the same dungeon, but randomly generated. The story has been pretty good, but...

spoiler:

Overall, I'm happy with the experience. It's a long game already, but the pacing could be better and it did feel like they rushed through the final stretch of the game. If they turn this into a series, like Persona, I hope they put more effort into creating dungeons that look and feel more worthwhile. A broader soundtrack wouldn't hurt either. Sometimes it felt like I was listening to the same 2-3 songs on repeat. They're certainly capable of at least matching Persona 5 in dungeon design and soundtrack. I imagine they'll devote more resources to a potential sequel, considering how successful this game has been.

I was quite content with the pacing but after the opera house (and this is a sentiment I've seen mentioned by a bunch of ppl) it feels like they rush through a lot of plot points, IMO probably budget issues/time constraints, the magic academy presumably would have been a proper dungeon compared to what we got and yeah, I was a fan of the OST but there's so little of it, Persona 5's was way more memorable. I think it's clear this just didn't have a similar budget to P5, but I hear its selling well so I'd expect them to have more faith in the series going forward if they go that route.

Dragon Age reviews not the Bioware return to form I was hoping for, fortunately it has no denuvo so I'll be acquiring it on PC

Firenze wrote:Dragon Age reviews not the Bioware return to form I was hoping for, fortunately it has no denuvo so I'll be acquiring it on PC

The reviews are confusing. Everything from mediocre and somewhat disappointing, to greatest of all time and perfect

Pedram wrote:

Thimmy wrote:

Firenze wrote:Dragon Age reviews not the Bioware return to form I was hoping for, fortunately it has no denuvo so I'll be acquiring it on PC

The reviews are confusing. Everything from mediocre and somewhat disappointing, to greatest of all time and perfect

Not surprised at Eurogamer's review, they've been very clear on what type of games they like, and this one ticks all the right boxes for them.

There's also these two, which seems like reviews of two different games.

The game is a flop just as I predicted

I've put maybe 5 hours into it so far and it's all so terribly uninteresting

Firenze wrote:I've put maybe 5 hours into it so far and it's all so terribly uninteresting

Yeah, I'm happy that I decided to give Romancing Saga 2 remake a chance instead. I wasn't familiar with this series of games, but I've really been enjoying it.

The system of passing down abilities between generations is pretty interesting, but I feel like a lot of the other features are trial and error since the game doesn't explain them very well.

Harmonica wrote:

Thimmy wrote:

Pedram wrote:


Not surprised at Eurogamer's review, they've been very clear on what type of games they like, and this one ticks all the right boxes for them.

There's also these two, which seems like reviews of two different games.

Harmonica wrote:Means absolutely nothing.

I don't read into reviews too much, but I tend to think that getting a certain impression from the average of them is better than nothing. Especially, if it's a game I'm on the fence about buying.

The biggest and most popular franchises seem to be particularly influenced by biased journalist reviews, and Dragon Age: Veilguard seems to be a prime example of that.

I haven't played it, but it seems like a largely mediocre game that's split between some journalists suggesting that it's perfect, and other ones rating it closer to "average". I don't like to suggest foul play, but it really does seem like some of these journalists had an added incentive to give the game top scores for no particular reason

BioWare just isn't the company it was, that is very obvious and it began with its internal conflict and apparently some...of course politically motivated devs within.

have not been able to produce a hit to save their life.

Thimmy wrote:

Harmonica wrote:

Thimmy wrote:


There's also these two, which seems like reviews of two different games.

Harmonica wrote:Means absolutely nothing.

I don't read into reviews too much, but I tend to think that getting a certain impression from the average of them is better than nothing. Especially, if it's a game I'm on the fence about buying.

The biggest and most popular franchises seem to be particularly influenced by biased journalist reviews, and Dragon Age: Veilguard seems to be a prime example of that.

I haven't played it, but it seems like a largely mediocre game that's split between some journalists suggesting that it's perfect, and other ones rating it closer to "average". I don't like to suggest foul play, but it really does seem like some of these journalists had an added incentive to give the game top scores for no particular reason

Popularity seldom is indication of quality, but popularity itself. It's just populism, and reviews too are written to appease an audience, and thus truth is lost in them.

Don't know how I would go on buying random games really, maybe by prestige and looking gameplay videos. I mostly play rpg's, and have learned past 30 years to pretty much see which are good and which are bad games. E.g. Starfield is the best vanilla BGS rpg release, but you would never learn this from looking in internet popularity playfield.

Btw, releases on 20th.

Damn I only have 220GB free space in my nvme so I probably need to upgrade that too. Textures are usually the big culprit, and developers probably optimize less and less nowadays. Looking my installed games, Starfield takes 150GB, and modded Skyrim too. And it's the textures that use all the space in Skyrim, and I guess in Starfield too as it has some of the best textures I've seen in a video game.

#26

Game: Front Mission 3:-
Year: 1999, 2000.
Genre: TRPG.
Publisher: Square.
Developer: Square.




The Front Mission series is one of the lesser-known Square franchises of the SNES and PS1 era. Despite releasing 4 games in 4 years, it never endeared itself to the public in the same way the Final Fantasy and Mana series managed to do, as evidenced by Front Mission 3 being the first game in the series to be localized for the West.

Thankfully, Front Mission 3 does a lot to advocate for the series, with its strong and mature storyline mixed with satisfying tactical RPG gameplay mechanics in the unforgettable modern-retro Cold War setting of the 22nd century.

"Desire spawns madness. Madness collapses into disaster. Mankind never learns"

The strength of the entire canon of the Front Mission series depends on its modern-retro Cold War setting, which allows for interesting and varied storylines to emerge within morally ambiguous lines. In the 22nd century, the world is divided between roughly four equally powerful superpowers, the most important of them being the Oceanic Cooperative Union [OCU] (Japan, Australia, and South East Asia) and the United States of the New Continents [USN] (All of the Americas). In this multi-polar world, where war is waged mostly in small combat missions through Mechs (called Wanzers here), technological and resource superiority are the only ways to break the deadlock, and that's where MIDAS comes in.

MIDAS is a nuclear-level weapon without harmful radiation effects, making it an effective tool without the associated environmental damage. It is in the undercover fight to control MIDAS that the game's main character, Kazuki Takemura, finds himself embroiled in clandestine wars beyond his understanding. Originally only attempting to save his adopted sister, Kazuki finds himself allied with different groups in trying to stop the threat of MIDAS, navigate a civil war in China, and even deal with a coup in Japan. At least, that's the story I pursued, since there are two paths that you can choose between at the game's start.

While the over-arching story of the game is interesting and intriguing, I can't say the same thing about the characters, especially Kazuki. Built with the same mold as late 90s Square protagonists, Kauzki is a brash and edgy character that is frankly easy to dislike despite being the most powerful unit in the game. Weirdly, other characters in the team compete to be even less likable, leaving you with a rather dislikable bunch bar the rare exceptions.

But then again, this might be part of the story's intention, which shows how power and greed can easily corrupt the best of intentions, and how humanity is doomed into a circle of conflict regardless of how they try to escape from it. In that regard, the brash set of characters, who may only find themselves on the moral side of the conflict through sheet accident and stubbornness, may make a twisted kind of sense.

"What's done is done. Only thing we can do is to move on"

War in the world of Front Mission evolved in a parallel less technological path than the real world, with battles in the 22snd century mostly depending on a small group of Wanzers controlling key positions, and that's where the player and his group come in. As an elite group of Wanzer pilots, you will be handling the most dangerous missions.

This translates in-game to a group of four, from a possible selection of eight, going against a combination of enemy Wanzers, tanks, and artillery in various grid-based maps. It's basic turn-based Tactical RPG gameplay, where you trade turns with the enemy and have all the time to make your choices. Each of your Wanzers has Action Points (AP), which allows you to move, attack, and counter. The nature of your attacks, movement options, and skills depend on the weapons and parts you fit for each character.

Speaking of parts, the game continues the trend of having four parts to each Wanzer (body, two arms, and legs) each responsible for certain aspects. The game also continues the trend of not being able to specifically target any enemy part. This is doubly annoying because destroying parts is the best way to gain EXP in the game and you don't want to inadvertently kill an enemy. Also, sometimes, you might want an enemy to surrender to gain their parts, but you end up blowing them up with an accidental skill activation. Thankfully, there is a simulation mode you can grind in for experience and money, although I never needed it.

Due to having only four characters, the battles are smaller this time around than previous Front Mission games, and consequently take a shorter time to beat. There are also over 50 battles for each storyline, so it is a hefty amount of gameplay.

Thankfully, despite being rather basic, the game remains fun throughout, and that's ironically due to some of its more frustrating aspects. There is a lot of randomness in the game, from which parts you target to which skills you learn and use, and that randomness reduces the predictability of rather simple battles, making them more challenging and fun despite the occasional frustration.

"Even at the cost of one's life, there are those you protect"

It may be slightly controversial, but it is arguable that the most important gameplay element in any Front Mission game, or for that matter, any Mech-based game, is the preparation work you do behind the scenes. While that may not be necessarily true here, since Mech customization doesn't go as in-depth as other games, it is still a big part of the game.

In short, how you fit your Wanzer decides their role and effectiveness in battle. In general, you trade off between bulk and range, and you can mix and match between different models to create your ideal Wanzer. You can buy most of the parts and weapons you need, but some choice Wanzer parts are only available by getting the corresponding enemy to surrender (which is a mostly random occurrence).

Your choice of parts also influences the game's skill system, since characters gain the skills associated with the parts they use provided they have an affinity for them. While the system can promise a lot of customization options, the fact is that it is too random to plan, and you will have to live with whatever skills you accidentally unlock for most characters.

Outside of battles and preparation is the optional in-game internet, which can be considered the game's major sidequest. In this in-game browser, you can explore various websites to get some knowledge about the world, and you can also hack into other websites to get secret intel culminating in finding the game's strongest Wanzer. While the amount of work to find all the information, figure out the different passwords, and decode others can be daunting, it is a charming but ultimately unnecessary distraction.

"Hey, at least they know we're badass! It's showtime!"

Like the rest of Square's catalog of games, Front Mission's move to the PS1 meant an emphasis on 3D graphics instead of the sprite work used on the SNES, and that works mostly fine. In battles, the camera shows an overhead view of the field and there is little difference between the polygonal models used and the sprites. However, during attacks, the camera zooms into the action showcasing larger 3D models that animate convincingly.

In fact, the Mechs, with their varied and realistic design sensibilities, are rendered so effectively that the majority of story scenes feature them instead of their human pilots. That may also be due to how ugly and low-res the human models are. In general, I don't think the game's graphics are its strongest suit, which despite the strong art direction of the series doesn't pop like it did on the SNES.

However, the same can't be said about the game's soundtrack, which is simply brilliant. Not only does it fit the theme and style of the game, but is simply great on its own terms. Featuring a great mix of synth and industrial sounds, it gives an increased sense of gravitas to battles while complimenting the grungy feeling of the Front Mission universe.

In Conclusion:

The Front Mission series, despite its pedigree, doesn't get the same love as other Square games, which is a shame since there is nothing quite like them. Inspired by Mech anime and Cold War era history, it manages to explore humanity from a modern and grey lens that few games touch upon.

When the game is as good as Front Mission 3, then that makes for a winning and unique combination. Unfortunately, it doesn't like the recent remakes of the first and second games on the Switch have succeeded, so I am not sure if the remake of the 3rd would. However, on the strength of its PS1 release, I hope that it does.

Final: 8/10

Pros:

• Great world setting
  
• Mature and morally ambiguous storyline
  
• Solid TRPG gameplay
  
• Unpredictablity adds a bit of fun
  
• Wanzer preparation can be fun
  
• The in-game browser side quest is interesting
  
• Brilliant soundtrack
  

Cons:

• Some of the main characters are truly obnoxious
  
• Some of the randomness is truly frustrating
  
• The random nature of the skill system
  
• 3D graphics show their age
  

"Tips"
1- The first choice you make with Ryogo decides which of the two paths you are going to take.
2- Destroying more enemy parts gets you more EXP.
3- Skills are unlocked randomly depending on the parts you are equipping.
4- It is better to focus on one or two weapon types per character.
5- The character you deploy first in each map attracts more aggro.
6- Equipping characters with shields can help a lot.
7- Make sure to match the defense type (once you unlock defense types) with the battle.
8- You can access the network at any time.
9- You can use the simulation program to grind for EXP and money.
10- Focus on getting enemies to surrender for easy money and extra parts.
11- To ensure enemies surrender, eject from your wanzer and shoot them with a gun.
12- Another method is shooting them with low-accuracy weapons.
13- Your party will split up into two groups several times, so use all members.


"Next Game"

This is not the first Front Mission game I played, so I fully expected to like Front Mission 3 and I wasn't disappointed. In fact, I think I had higher expectations of the game, but a few minor flaws kept if from getting a higher score.

The next game in my review schedule will be the first Silent Hill game which sits comfortably at #23 in the Retro Sanctuary list. I am not sure if a PS1 game can frighten me anymore, but I am sure it will try its best.

Stay Tuned