Yeah, it'll probably win the GameFAQs poll...

[AndrewTS 0]

Cannon Spike, House of the dead 2 and sword of the berserk are medicore at best. Also the sega smash pack is horrid, screwed sound and slowdown on a 128bit system? I'll stick to emulation. And with exception of the gba version the DC version of Alpha 3 is supposed to be the weakest port. The PSX had much more accurate VC activation.

 

I love Cannon Spike, mainly because it's mainly an expanded Robotron-ish shoot-tons-of-****-up game with bosses that seem to be straight out of an overhead shooter at times.

 

House of the Dead 2 was kind of similar. I dig the fast-paced arcadey shooters even if I'm not too good at them.

 

I don't recall the slowdown in Smash Pack, supposedly there's some in Sonic--but I already have Jam so it's no big deal. The sound is terrible, I'll admit, but I got the Pack for free, so I'd say it was a good deal.

 

I was never much of a VC guy, so I don't know what you mean about Alpha 3, but the loading times and choppy animation of the PS1 version--I couldn't take it after getting used to RAM-cart-assisted Saturn fighters, even if the PS1 version was a far better conversation than thought possible for the PS1. Granted, I don't even like the game that much anyway, so for me at least it's a non-factor.

 

Why did you add Project Justice to that list? It's like a Marvel vs. game in 3D, and the gameplay is just typical run-of-the-mill Capcom. It's not exceptionally deep or anything. I like it myself, but it isn't a game I'd bring up to try to woo people to the Dreamcast.

 

Ecco, Code Veronica, and Space Channel are all on PS2, and I believe all improved in some way.

 

Wasn't Ecco almost universally panned by most reviewers?

 

Oh, and Chu-Chu Rocket > Final Fantasy 7 or 8

[Guest Askewniverse]

My list of games worth owning for the DC (that haven't been mentioned yet):

 

Tony Hawk's Pro Skater

Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 2

NFL 2K

NHL 2K2

Metropolis Street Racer

Ferrari F355 Challenge

Fatal Fury: Mark of the Wolves

[AndrewTS 0]

^. All of those but MotW can be found for about 2 bucks in the DC bargain bins.

 

Mark of the Wolves is supposed to be a horrible port, so even though I really like it, that's why I didn't mention it.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

The problem with the Dreamcast was Sega. They killed their entire consumer base with the 32X/Sega CD crap, so even when they did turn things around their name was so tainted that nobody would give them a chance. Same thing that happened with WCW.

[Guest Askewniverse]

^. All of those but MotW can be found for about 2 bucks in the DC bargain bins.

 

Mark of the Wolves is supposed to be a horrible port, so even though I really like it, that's why I didn't mention it.

True, but they're all good games...well, at least in my opinion. At those prices, I'm tempted to buy a DC and those games (again).

 

Note to self: don't trade in games/systems to EB or GameStop ever again.

[Jer 0]

Oh sorry, I should have been more clear, I was only comparing launches. I remember a lot of people at the time were complaining about how people should be buying DC instead of PS2 because DC had a stronger library, not taking into account the fact that DC was a year older and should, naturally, have more good games. My argument was always that it makes more sense to compare launches (otherwise the older system will always be better), and in that sense PS2 wins out. And yeah, TTT is worth buying the system for.

 

DC did get some neat stuff later, and is still the system of choice for most 2D fighters, but I still find its library to be highly overrated. It seems like a good deal of people like it just because it's less popular with the mainstream. Shrug.

[AndrewTS 0]

DC did get some neat stuff later, and is still the system of choice for most 2D fighters, but I still find its library to be highly overrated. It seems like a good deal of people like it just because it's less popular with the mainstream. Shrug.

 

 

I'm sure there are plenty of other factors:

 

The price: when the DC was beginning to die, it because the perfect budget system with tons of great titles available dirt cheap. Before a lot of the titles were realized to be "rare" or in high demand, you could nab them easily. Even today you can get great DC games for 15 bucks and cheaper.

 

How about how the system had a lot of great titles way before they were ported/given sequels for the other systems, so the DC owners have little incentive to rush out for the upgrades/ports?

 

How about how the DC is so import-friendly, you can play a wealth of import titles with a Gameshark or simple swap trick?

 

Four controller ports from the get-go, so you have no need for an adapter.

 

Except for the way-too-ahead-of-its-time X-Band, it was the first console to support online gaming, and could be used to surf the net.

 

Yeah, those 2D fighters don't hurt, either.

 

Plus, hackers and pirates love the DC for obvious reasons--naturally that wasn't intended by Sega, of course.

 

The hardcore aspect probably is a factor as well.

 

For some reason or another, I usually have maybe 7 PS2 titles at any given time, but far more DC titles. The DC just has more sorts of titles I want to play--arcade ports, shooters, odd and quirky Sega stuff, fighters. Either they aren't out for PS2, they've been on on DC and I got them, or I'd have to mutilate my system and spend a crapload to import to play the same games.

[Guest Askewniverse]

I just checked the GameFAQs tournament brackets and FF VII is matched up against Zelda: OoT in the current round. This isn't out of bias, but if FF VII beats Zelda, there's something wrong. Then again, I think it's wrong that FF VII beat MGS.

[AndrewTS 0]

I just checked the GameFAQs tournament brackets and FF VII is matched up against Zelda: OoT in the current round. This isn't out of bias, but if FF VII beats Zelda, there's something wrong. Then again, I think it's wrong that FF VII beat MGS.

Link's the only one that can overcome it...

 

Of course, right now Chrono Trigger is matched up with LTTP--my vote went to LTTP.

 

Where's Link's Awakening on this biotch?

 

Smash Bros. Melee beat FFX, though. Which is shocking because FFX is at least a hell of a lot better than VII.

[USC Wuz Robbed! 0]

I just checked the GameFAQs tournament brackets and FF VII is matched up against Zelda: OoT in the current round. This isn't out of bias, but if FF VII beats Zelda, there's something wrong. Then again, I think it's wrong that FF VII beat MGS.

That was my sentiment exactly. I was so pissed FF7 beat out MGS. I'm hoping it doesn't beat out OOT, because if it does, that makes 2 straight personal favorites that FF7 knocked out.

[Guest Askewniverse]

Smash Bros. Melee beat FFX, though.  Which is shocking because FFX is at least a hell of a lot better than VII.

I'm not too surprised. SSBM is just about as overrated as FF VII at the GameFAQs boards. I bought SSBM a few months ago, due to the hype. Personally, I didn't think it was half as great as the GameFAQers made it out to be. I ended up trading it in for $15 at GameStop (which didn't bother me because I originally paid $12.50 for it).

 

 

I just checked the GameFAQs tournament brackets and FF VII is matched up against Zelda: OoT in the current round. This isn't out of bias, but if FF VII beats Zelda, there's something wrong. Then again, I think it's wrong that FF VII beat MGS.

That was my sentiment exactly. I was so pissed FF7 beat out MGS. I'm hoping it doesn't beat out OOT, because if it does, that makes 2 straight personal favorites that FF7 knocked out.

Well, at the moment, FF VII is beating OOT by around 7%, which I don't really like. Personally, I'd put both OOT and MGS ahead of FF VII. In my opinion, OOT and MGS have a lot better gameplay than FF VII. I'd say that the FAQers are biased, but I don't want to stereotype.

[Lightning Flik 0]

I'd say that the FAQers are biased, but I don't want to stereotype.

They ARE bias. Have you ever attempted a convo on their boards? My fucking God, I've never seen more people in need of getting to the outside world, or actually enjoying a game for the game.

[AndrewTS 0]

Incidentally, Starcraft managed to beat Wind Waker. However, that's probably because OMG LNK l00ks sp ghey & kid-3!!!~

 

"I'd say that the FAQers are biased, but I don't want to stereotype."

 

Well then mister, you're a better man than I...

[EricMM 0]

Starcraft is a pretty good game

[Guest Askewniverse]

I'd say that the FAQers are biased, but I don't want to stereotype.

They ARE bias. Have you ever attempted a convo on their boards? My fucking God, I've never seen more people in need of getting to the outside world, or actually enjoying a game for the game.

I've never even bothered to register at GameFAQs. Judging by what I've read, if I did post at the GameFAQs boards, I'd probably be called an idiot and be accused of flaming because (1) I don't like RPGs, (2) I don't like SSBM, and (3) I like sports games.

 

Disclaimer: The following statements are based on what I've read. I'm not calling every single person who posts at GameFAQs an idiot.

 

Most of the people who post on the boards seem like a bunch of spoiled kids pretending to be older than they actually are. There are way too many "OMG, I jsut got $50 dolars, wut game shud I get" posts, not to mention the ever so popular "rate my game collection" threads. I'll stop there...I could go on and on about the chuckleheads at GameFAQs. Now, don't get me wrong. I only think the boards are bad. The actual FAQs are very good.

 

Incidentally, Starcraft managed to beat Wind Waker.  However, that's probably because OMG LNK l00ks sp ghey & kid-3!!!~

If people voted against Wind Waker just because of the graphics, they're morons.

 

Personally, I liked WW. I only managed to get as far as searching for the triforce pieces, but from what I've played, WW is a pretty good game. I'll probably buy a copy sooner or later so that I can finish the game.

[chaosrage 0]

Hey, I'm playing WW right now looking for the triforce pieces too. Just can't find that last piece. I think this is about close to the end though. The only thing left is the last dungeon. But IMO this is the game Zelda: OoT should've been. Zelda was never about huge barren amounts of space in the middle of the map that takes 20 minutes to cross. It was always about secrets everwhere. Like WW. Every single place you look in has something in it. And the world is so much bigger than Ocarina's.

 

FF7 vs Zelda: OoT is a great battle. The fight of the two most overrated games ever made.

[Anya 0]

I just read that article again. Awful. I can't believe that apparently passes for journalism. How is that any better than the stuff at Gamefaqs? Are childish, inane rants acceptable as long as you agree with what they're saying?

 

 

I liked how they suggested you can do limit breaks and summons over and over. Really showing their in depth knowledge of FF VII's basic mechanics with that one. I wouldn't be surprised if they saw other people bashing VIII for that and just got confused and figured it applied to VII as well.

 

 

It was good to see Fighting Vipers mentioned though. When rambling about a popular game and how you hate "the masses" it's always good to name drop a C list fighting game. Soooo hardcore.

[AndrewTS 0]

I just read that article again. Awful. I can't believe that apparently passes for journalism.

 

Thing is, it doesn't. You think that was the point?

 

How is that any better than the stuff at Gamefaqs? Are childish, inane rants acceptable as long as you agree with what they're saying?

 

You're the queen of it; you tell us.

 

I liked how they suggested you can do limit breaks and summons over and over. Really showing their in depth knowledge of FF VII's basic mechanics with that one.

 

I'm trying to wrap my head about what's inaccurate about that. Any tough battles might knock you into 2-3 limit breaks.

 

It was good to see Fighting Vipers mentioned though. When rambling about a popular game and how you hate "the masses" it's always good to name drop a C list fighting game. Soooo hardcore.

 

Any game with a Bon Jovi clone in it deserves to be incessantly mocked anyway, so no argument.

[Lightning Flik 0]

I just read that article again. Awful. I can't believe that apparently passes for journalism.

 

Thing is, it doesn't. You think that was the point?

 

How is that any better than the stuff at Gamefaqs? Are childish, inane rants acceptable as long as you agree with what they're saying?

 

You're the queen of it; you tell us.

 

Can the flaming please be down to a minimum? You guys really get far to out of hand with this.

 

I liked how they suggested you can do limit breaks and summons over and over. Really showing their in depth knowledge of FF VII's basic mechanics with that one.

 

I'm trying to wrap my head about what's inaccurate about that. Any tough battles might knock you into 2-3 limit breaks.

 

Andrew you must've been underleveled or something because Limit Breaks didn't come along 3 times in one battle unless you were down to one person and also were taking more than half of your HP as damage. The one you should be busting chops over was the summons.

 

No offense, but as soon as summons became used with MP and usable by everyone (not just a specialized person), it sorta shot the system hard.

 

It was good to see Fighting Vipers mentioned though. When rambling about a popular game and how you hate "the masses" it's always good to name drop a C list fighting game. Soooo hardcore.

 

Any game with a Bon Jovi clone in it deserves to be incessantly mocked anyway, so no argument.

 

Andrew, it still doesn't help their arguement against the game. That's just trying to look like you actually have a clue, when you don't.

[AndrewTS 0]

Can the flaming please be down to a minimum? You guys really get far to out of hand with this.

 

Does it bother you? I'd think you'd be used to it by now.

 

You realize neither of us are taking this personally, right?

 

Andrew you must've been underleveled or something because Limit Breaks didn't come along 3 times in one battle unless you were down to one person and also were taking more than half of your HP as damage. The one you should be busting chops over was the summons.

 

If you have three party members, it's very likely to get 2-3 of them to get their limit breaks if you're taking heavy damage.

 

I never said one person could get it 2-3 times per battle.

 

I didn't bust her chops about the summons because she, as usual, didn't provide any actual examples or evidence backing up her points. Therefore, nothing to actually dissect was there. She just said it was so, and that was that.

 

Frankly, I think the desperation attacks in VI worked better--when you were low on life, randomly you'd do an ultra-powerful counter-attack. However, if you get a love tap as your Limit Break meter is about full, but you have almost full HP and you have no other choice but to use it when the gauge is flashing--the LBs aren't quite as useful, are they?

 

 

No offense, but as soon as summons became used with MP and usable by everyone (not just a specialized person), it sorta shot the system hard.

 

Sakura disagrees. Lord knows why, or what basis she has for it.

 

Andrew, it still doesn't help their arguement against the game.

 

*gasp* Really?

 

I was agreeing with her about that part. Do I have to spell it out for you? "N-O A-R-G-U-M-E-N-T." By definition, that means we're agreeing on a point. Capiche?

 

That's just trying to look like you actually have a clue, when you don't.

 

Who is the one flaming now, hypocrite?

[Anya 0]

Getting 2 or 3 limits in a tough battle does not = "you can just do limits over and over to win the game~!".

 

Besides, in a tough battle 2 or 3 limits wouldn't be that big of a deal anyway. 2 or 3 limits would not kill a hard boss. Limits are not that powerful in VII.

 

 

Without heavy leveling you cannot do summons over and over. Even with tons and tons of leveling you can only do them a few times per battle. They also take a bunch of MP to do. You can't abuse them to win random battles because it will drain your MP too fast and you can't do them over and over again to bosses because you can only do them once or twice per fight.

 

 

Maybe if they're talking about end game with high levels, stuff like KOTOR and Omnislash...but they're not. They just mean the average play. In fact they even go so far as to say you can run away from random battles and still use these tactics. That is nonsense. An underleveled party doing Ifrit and Cross Slash a couple times against a boss is not going to be game breakingly powerful.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

Frankly, I think the desperation attacks in VI worked better--when you were low on life, randomly you'd do an ultra-powerful counter-attack. However, if you get a love tap as your Limit Break meter is about full, but you have almost full HP and you have no other choice but to use it when the gauge is flashing--the LBs aren't quite as useful, are they?

 

I agree on this, but since Limit Breaks are the ONLY thing besides weapons in FFVII that are different among the different characters, I don't complain too much about it. I actually think that the Limit Breaks in FFVIII, which are similar to the FFVI ones but less random, are the best in the series. Unlike FFVI you can actually build strategies around it. It doesn't save that game of course, but it should be noted regardless.

[Jer 0]

The big problem with the limits in VIII, if I'm remembering correctly, is that you could pass your turn to get another chance at getting one, so if one character is ready, you can keep passing their turn and eventually they'll get a limit break. That meant that you could just do limit breaks every time, which was pretty lame.

 

I liked limit breaks in FF7, although they were generally too random to build a strategy around besides just going into hard battles with everyone's limit full.

[Lightning Flik 0]

*snip*

Who is the one flaming now, hypocrite?

...I really need not to post argumental subjects in the middle of the night. Yeesh, I come out looking like an ass. Sorry about that Andrew. Ergh... What the fuck was I thinking last night? Oh well.

 

Anyways, looking on the whole FF series, I can honestly say that to be fair, I wouldn't rank more than 1 of them in a Top 10 list of RPGs.

[Anya 0]

Limits are broken in VIII. You can keep skipping your turn, but only if your life is in or near critical. That's still cheap though. But far more powerful is the spell Aura, which lets you stay in Limit status for a long time no matter your HP. Aura on Squall with the Lionheart weapon is way too strong.

[AndrewTS 0]

Besides, in a tough battle 2 or 3 limits wouldn't be that big of a deal anyway. 2 or 3 limits would not kill a hard boss. Limits are not that powerful in VII.

 

 

Without heavy leveling you cannot do summons over and over. Even with tons and tons of leveling you can only do them a few times per battle. They also take a bunch of MP to do. You can't abuse them to win random battles because it will drain your MP too fast and you can't do them over and over again to bosses because you can only do them once or twice per fight.

 

Tough battles would be, say, when you enter a new area with significantly tougher areas.

 

"Hard boss" in FFVII? The Weapons? Those are the only ones I can actually think of. The rest, including Seph, are pussies. You have to love the Most Overblown, Excessive, Freakin' Long Summon Ever, and then you laugh your ass off at how much damage it actually did to your party.

 

I'm thinking they were mostly on the mark with the "select Fight over and over" thing, although the "summon and run away" stuff does seem to directly contradict that. So, which is it? They don't really clarify what they're saying. Summons in most battles would be pretty much a waste.

 

You could use Summons a hell of a lot if you keep a nice stockpile of MP-restoring items. Unlike, say, FFIV, items and money to buy items with were extremely plentiful. Ditto for VI.

 

Personally, from what I remember from memory (because I was mostly a "Fight, occasionally use Magic" battler myself), summons were briefly useful about half to 3/4 of the way through the game, then they become pretty freakin' useless, because all but a couple of summons are single-hitters, and you can do about as much damage with a single "Fight" strike. Yeah, most of the single-hitters hit all enemies...but that's only a big deal in a random battle (since most bosses are single-target), which almost never would be a tough battle to begin with.

 

That's another problem that FFVI shares, because late in the game the Espers are reduced to little more than stat bonus items. The actual summons get to be useless.

 

...I really need not to post argumental subjects in the middle of the night. Yeesh, I come out looking like an ass. Sorry about that Andrew. Ergh... What the fuck was I thinking last night? Oh well.

 

Heh, apology accepted.

 

Anyways, looking on the whole FF series, I can honestly say that to be fair, I wouldn't rank more than 1 of them in a Top 10 list of RPGs.

 

I should hope so. I mean, I'd expect that from a FFanatic who has played all of 3 non-Square RPGs in his/her life, but you should know better.

[Anya 0]

If you had a lot of ethers and other items you could do summons in every battle, but why bother? You don't need them in random battles. Against bosses where they'd survive a summon you can't do them over and over no matter how much MP you have.

 

Dropped the limit thing, eh?

 

 

 

Attack, attack, attack, attack, attack, cure, attack, attack, attack, ect. works in every FF.

[Slayer 0]

Attack, attack, attack, attack, attack, cure, attack, attack, attack, ect. works in every FF.

Apparently it works in this thread too

[AndrewTS 0]

"Dropped the limit thing, eh?"

 

Sure, you sufficiently defended your point, so I conceed. Not that it was my argument against the game in the first place, but that isn't a significant problem with the game, as it apparently is in FFVIII.

 

I last played the game, what, 7 years ago? I trust your knowledge about it is probably far more accurate than mine, even if I believe your praise for it is very undeserved.

 

"Attack, attack, attack, attack, attack, cure, attack, attack, attack, ect. works in every FF."

 

Yeah. And considering there isn't a hell of a lot of skill or brainpower involved in it, shouldn't that change? It's 2004. Surely Square can try a better battle system by now.

 

...oh wait, they did. It's in Kingdom Hearts, not in Final Fantasy.

[Anya 0]

Nah, it's still fun. They really should do something about random battles though.

 

KH's battle system gets really old, because of how the baddies respawn. That is worse than random battles.