-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Final Fantasy XIII |OT|
- Thread starter Kagari
- Start date
- Status
rofl @ the XIII defense force still going strong in here. "Each combat system has its strengths and weaknesses" :lol XIII is XII's combat system with more exciting camera angles and un-alterable gambits. Why can't people fucking realize this?
Less control doesn't equal better. It can't, unless you want to be a more passive gamer. Period.
I truly commend XIII for crafting such a powerful illusion though. It's actually managed to convince so many people that they're in as much control of what's happening as they were in the last twelve games. Amazing.
Less control doesn't equal better. It can't, unless you want to be a more passive gamer. Period.
I truly commend XIII for crafting such a powerful illusion though. It's actually managed to convince so many people that they're in as much control of what's happening as they were in the last twelve games. Amazing.
Rahxephon91
Banned
It its the "Official FFXIII thread".....Magnus said:
I would assume people who kind of like the game would post here.
And I wouldn't say XIII is exactly XII's battle system.
I don't thats what most are saying. Most are saying the game is more like the "coach of the party" or "playing the whole party at ounce". Most arguments are that the AI is fine. If you don't think so whatever. Not going to argue that.
Regardless posts like this is why the FFXIII "Defense force" is still strong.
Magnus said:
Most people don't think very hard about the systems that they play in. To an extent, I would say that the removal of "alterable gambits" is what gives FF13 its flavor in its system, because the system encourages the idea of 'party teamwork' despite being controlled by only one person.
I am actually wondering what could have happened if they stuck to the original concept they had in the initial E3 2006 trailer, the one where there was no semblance of a party. If they wanted it so cinematic, why didn't they try for just one-man army battles all the time? It would have been a more significantly different evolution from XII than what XIII turned out to be. At the same time they wouldn't have had to worry so much about how much they could put on the screen, and maybe even have seamless battles on the field. Considering how boring the fields are, this certainly could have been an improvement.
Who knows?
Magnus said:
Come on, don't act like the way the other side was acting toward negativity.
There is no 'defense force' in this thread, just like there is no offense force (lol). It's just a bunch of people passionate about their positions. We can disagree without being disagreeable (I guess this is first grade shit
)Anyway, I agree with your central point, there is no logical arguments about how Paradigms are different than gambits, only worse because you have zero control in shaping them. But let's be reasonable about it
To me, as I explained, gambits would have gone a long way toward making the system functional for me. I don't mind the speed, and the retarded jumping about is what it is, but it's just the fact that the A.I. is so mediocre that does it. Even if the A.I. was damn near PERFECT, i still would want gambits. It's simply too little control in a system that depends too much on how your allies perform (after all, if your MAIN CHARACTER fucking dies, it's game over).
In the end, I think we've made the point clear.
Crash Station
Member
Magnus said:
It's not that simple and you know it. Speed and extra ATB bars are a big deal.
Rahxephon91
Banned
I really just can't take it anymore.nubbe said:
nubbe said:
I like the music a lot!
Oerba
Sunleth Waterscape
Battle theme
Barthandelus (imo one of the best boss tracks of any FF game)
Imo, the soundtrack IS the best thing about the game.
Amir0x said:Come on, don't act like the way the other side was acting toward negativity.
There is no 'defense force' in this thread, just like there is no offense force (lol). It's just a bunch of people passionate about their positions. We can disagree without being disagreeable (I guess this is first grade shit
Anyway, I agree with your central point, there is no logical arguments about how Paradigms are different than gambits, only worse because you have zero control in shaping them. But let's be reasonable about it
To me, as I explained, gambits would have gone a long way toward making the system functional for me. I don't mind the speed, and the retarded jumping about is what it is, but it's just the fact that the A.I. is so mediocre that does it. Even if the A.I. was damn near PERFECT, i still would want gambits. It's simply too little control in a system that depends too much on how your allies perform (after all, if your MAIN CHARACTER fucking dies, it's game over).
In the end, I think we've made the point clear.
Argh, I just feel helpless watching people be so entertained by something so fundamentally screwed up. Moments of rage overtake me and type hateful things out for me. :lol
I can't be constructive in this debate anymore, so I guess I'll have to leave it alone.
And yeah, the music is easily the game's high point for me. Chapter 11, the battle themes, it's good stuff sometimes.
RE: extra ATB bars -- I never really understood how it was a clearcut advantage to have say, 5 ATB bars instead of 4? I mean, the extra wait to charge all five all up seemed to negate the advantage of five attacks in one turn instead of four. And I realize that some attacks required 3, 4 (or even 5?) ATB bars all their own, like the Ravager "overdrives".
What frustrated me was that you couldn't designate multiple targets for heals in one turn. Kind of defeated the purpose of having 5 bars if I had to limit all 5 actions to one target. (unless that target died mid-turn)
Or say, Hope using 2 bars to cast Haste on one person, and then using 2 bars to cast Haste on another. Couldn't happen. He'd have to use 2, cast, wait to charge up 2 again, and then cast on a new target.
Sometimes it is definitely infuriating when it appears people are being intentionally ignorant about something that is pretty much indisputable, but i don't think anybody is doing it out of spite.
People just like the game a lot (just like we dislike the game a lot). When you like something so much, it clouds your judgment about it. Just like when you hate something too much, it might hamper your ability to properly see the good.
People just like the game a lot (just like we dislike the game a lot). When you like something so much, it clouds your judgment about it. Just like when you hate something too much, it might hamper your ability to properly see the good.
Crash Station
Member
Magnus said:
You have to throw objectivity out the window in instances like this. Have you ever thought that something "fundamentally screwed up" could be more entertaining than something that isn't? I've said it before but "flawed" doesn't necessarily mean worse.
You can talk all day about how gambits are better or whatever but there are enough differences for some people to put this battle system over 12's. I'd rather have a hectic battle system where I can change the general roles of characters on the fly than do a bunch of pre-battle preparation. Yes, I know there's that in this game as well but I'm not accounting for every situations because I want to experience them in the moment. I'm well aware of the problems with the A.I. but I think both you and Amir0x have blown them out of proportion. It wasn't until the post-game when I had to come up with strategies all a human could come up with was I dissatisfied.
So don't give me all that "you've fallen into the illusion" crap. I'm well aware of the pros and cons of both and simplifying it isn't helping anyone's argument. You like gambits better; great. I like paradigms better.
The thing thats making him infuriated is that there is no difference between paradigms and gambits on a functional level. Paradigms are gambits you did not program. Do you understand that? The only difference is that you have no control over it, and that you have to rely on the A.I. which frequently makes mistakes.
What benefits is there, then, to Paradigms over Gambits? There are none. There are no logical arguments in that way, because there is no benefit either to gameplay or to the flow of the game.
You can have a battle system with the speed of FFXIII, with job switching like FFXIII, and still maintain paradigms which you merely program instead of being programmed for you.
The reason it is infuriating for Magus is because you're essentially saying that it's better, because you sit and watch the screen glazed eyes and without control. Watch a movie then.
We're saying you can have what makes FFXIII system fun for you - to battle strategy switching, the speed - and implement a system that allows the level of customization and A.I. tweaking that won't allow the mediocre A.I. to fuck battles up.
Even if you think the A.I. is perfect, there is still no logical argument to liking paradigms over gambits, imo. Only irrational ones. Gambits are paradigms you yourself design.
What benefits is there, then, to Paradigms over Gambits? There are none. There are no logical arguments in that way, because there is no benefit either to gameplay or to the flow of the game.
You can have a battle system with the speed of FFXIII, with job switching like FFXIII, and still maintain paradigms which you merely program instead of being programmed for you.
The reason it is infuriating for Magus is because you're essentially saying that it's better, because you sit and watch the screen glazed eyes and without control. Watch a movie then.
We're saying you can have what makes FFXIII system fun for you - to battle strategy switching, the speed - and implement a system that allows the level of customization and A.I. tweaking that won't allow the mediocre A.I. to fuck battles up.
Even if you think the A.I. is perfect, there is still no logical argument to liking paradigms over gambits, imo. Only irrational ones. Gambits are paradigms you yourself design.
Amir0x said:
Agreed with all of this
Edit: also the high point of the game for me is basically this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jU-GfmEftU4&feature=related
Boss Battle music.
Crash Station
Member
Amir0x said:
Okay, well that makes more sense. I thought we were just talking about the entire battle system. I wouldn't be against gambits being implemented but they would have to be EXTREMELY limited and only account for situations the A.I. isn't capable of.
See, I respect your position, but you're just still not thinking it through. Now why would we implement gambits, only to implement extreme restrictions?
The only limitation I would see that makes sense is that gambits can only be set within the restraints of a job class.
So, for example, you can't have Ravager-type abilities being gambited into Commando-type class.
Limitations for limitations sake is bad game design. I understand the appeal of the battle system for people. That
a.) they feel they're engaged in switching fundamental battle strategies on the fly
b.) you feel you've never been able to do such strategy switching at such a high speed
c.) you feel that limiting characters to pre-defined classes gives each strategy more weight and importance
I can respect all those ideas. And I think the ideas are sound. But we can respect those ideas and allow the battle system to flow exactly the way it does now, even if we implemented complex A.I. tweaking in the form of gambits. All it would do is add a CUSTOM paradigm option, which would allow you to switch your own customized paradigm class in and out of battle. It really would fix the biggest problem I have with the gameplay. I think I would even love the battle system if this happened.
The only limitation I would see that makes sense is that gambits can only be set within the restraints of a job class.
So, for example, you can't have Ravager-type abilities being gambited into Commando-type class.
Limitations for limitations sake is bad game design. I understand the appeal of the battle system for people. That
a.) they feel they're engaged in switching fundamental battle strategies on the fly
b.) you feel you've never been able to do such strategy switching at such a high speed
c.) you feel that limiting characters to pre-defined classes gives each strategy more weight and importance
I can respect all those ideas. And I think the ideas are sound. But we can respect those ideas and allow the battle system to flow exactly the way it does now, even if we implemented complex A.I. tweaking in the form of gambits. All it would do is add a CUSTOM paradigm option, which would allow you to switch your own customized paradigm class in and out of battle. It really would fix the biggest problem I have with the gameplay. I think I would even love the battle system if this happened.
Rahxephon91
Banned
I have no problems with gambits. I like FFXII a lot more then XIII. I just think XIII stands fine on its own and as it is I'm not sure I need gambits in it. I don't really think the game needs it for to be more fun then it already is. Now if their was an international version that added something like gambits, yeah I would be eager to try it out.
Crash Station
Member
Amir0x said:
When I say limitations, I mean something the A.I. wouldn't normally do. For example, a Synergist will ALWAYS cast haste first. Maybe use a gambit to have them cast enfire first or something.
Amir0x said:see that's fine. I can respect that idea. Just not this idea that paradigms are better than gambits. It's just a more restricted gambit system.
The idea that you can still have fun anyway, even though it's more restrictive, is fine though. No objections
Class is dismissed!
Wouldn't having more fun with something make it better for that person?
So I think were I to review this game, I'd go on a huge rambling diatribe about FFXIII working on a curve of quality.
See, I'm unsure if I'm alone on this, but I started the game off with 0 expectations. The first 2 hours of the game may as well not even be playable , the story fails to make any sense , none of the fights give you any experience and only about 20% of the full gameplay is even opened up to you. But , knowing how long past final fantasies take to get off the ground , I pressed on.
Sure enough Ch3,4, fill in many blanks story wise so the whole thing starts to make a bit more sense as well you get access to the remaining portions of the combat and even weapon customization. This was enough for me , it pushed me through chapter 5 and 6.
But something was growing in the back of my mind... it was a sense of boredom slowly creeping in , despite chapter 7 being very exciting storywise , the battle system was already growing a bit tired for me. Some of it's flaws began to crop up , the forced pairings of shit character combos bugged me (come on snow and hope ?) and more recently I completed chapter 8 and was downright bored by it.
See, the first 15 hours or so (chapter 1-6) I played through in around a week , I was compelled to press on despite the flaws. But it's now taken me nearly a month to play around 3.5 more hours.
Currently saved at the start of chapter 9 and I just don't know if I care to push on beyond some false sense that I did buy the game and I may as well atleast get to chapter 11 to see what all the fuss is about.
The game is just starting to feel like a movie that's run on for too long though, what does neogaf have to say on this subject ? I'd still like to carry on with this game, but will this underlying feeling of boredom pass ? is it just chapter 7/8 that suck character /dungeon wise ? Are 9-13 an improvement ?
See, I'm unsure if I'm alone on this, but I started the game off with 0 expectations. The first 2 hours of the game may as well not even be playable , the story fails to make any sense , none of the fights give you any experience and only about 20% of the full gameplay is even opened up to you. But , knowing how long past final fantasies take to get off the ground , I pressed on.
Sure enough Ch3,4, fill in many blanks story wise so the whole thing starts to make a bit more sense as well you get access to the remaining portions of the combat and even weapon customization. This was enough for me , it pushed me through chapter 5 and 6.
But something was growing in the back of my mind... it was a sense of boredom slowly creeping in , despite chapter 7 being very exciting storywise , the battle system was already growing a bit tired for me. Some of it's flaws began to crop up , the forced pairings of shit character combos bugged me (come on snow and hope ?) and more recently I completed chapter 8 and was downright bored by it.
See, the first 15 hours or so (chapter 1-6) I played through in around a week , I was compelled to press on despite the flaws. But it's now taken me nearly a month to play around 3.5 more hours.
Currently saved at the start of chapter 9 and I just don't know if I care to push on beyond some false sense that I did buy the game and I may as well atleast get to chapter 11 to see what all the fuss is about.
The game is just starting to feel like a movie that's run on for too long though, what does neogaf have to say on this subject ? I'd still like to carry on with this game, but will this underlying feeling of boredom pass ? is it just chapter 7/8 that suck character /dungeon wise ? Are 9-13 an improvement ?
cosmicblizzard said:
No, see, what I said is that it's fine if someone has fun ANYWAY, despite the restrictions. Nowhere does it say one has "more fun." Paradigms are just more restricted gambits. There is no way to have more fun with Paradigms unless you're just choosing to ignore this fact for reason of painting yourself in a corner in the discussion.
What you're talking about (and why I think you're getting confused in our discussion) is the implementation of paradigms into the battle itself. That is to say, the shuffling in and out of battle strategies on the fly. This is something FFXII did not have. THAT is the part you like. Not the actual individual paradigm. The individual paradigms and its A.I. programming is trumped by the gambits on every level, because gambits are factually superior in all ways because it is the player controlling the A.I. and deciding what happens when.
Pachinko said:
You're almost to chp11. In chp11, i managed to enjoy myself a little bit. It is the only chapter where I really enjoyed myself at all. Other than that, I just liked hearing the soundtrack and occasionally looking at a pretty background
Crash Station
Member
Amir0x said:
I was just asking that as a general question, not referring to anything. Yeah, sorry for going off topic. I understand what's going on with the whole paradigm vs gambit debate. I don't want to say it's impossible to enjoy paradigms more than gambits because there's a bunch of factors that we might not have accounted for. Maybe programming the gambits pisses someone off so much they can't enjoy the system yet somehow they have fun choosing paradigms before battle. Of course that's probably rare so I'll just concede for now.
Rahxephon91
Banned
Yeah they should have not only made pulse bigger and have a central hub for questing(I guess a town) in it ,but also introduce smaller Pulse like areas around Cocoon. The main reason the party went to Pulse was because they were desperate, I'm pretty sure that excuse could have been used for areas in between the linear ones.
cosmicblizzard said:
Defeats the purpose.
Although I certainly understand, and sort of agree with what you are saying.
Personally, I wished they had gone completely macro:
-Abilities can be turned on/of so the AI does not use them
-Ability to force any party member to use a specific ability
-Ability to assume direct control of any character.
-Leader death = game over, removed. I have no issue with the idea, but it does not really add much to the game or make much sense at times.
-Remove auto battle. Or at the least, rename it.
-'Gambits' - While I personally love 12's implementation of scripting, I think that 13's system is not built much for it. I would prefer a system much more similar to the tales series. You set a suite of behaviors for the paradigms in that fashion and map shortcuts to some abilities you wish to force without having to change to the party member (like making Sazh's punk ass cast haste).
-Ability to change formations/positions on the fly. Perhaps even gaining boosts for certain formations (like paradigms)
With these changes, I feel that the game would do what the designers wanted, a game where you manage the flow of battle and not the minutiae. More or less what FF12 wanted to do, but actually giving the player more things to do in simpler battles.
Mr. Wonderful
Member
It's just funny because Chapter 11 literally IS Final Fantasy X-Lite, with a little of Final Fantasy XII thrown in. The world/level design is just about the same as X, in that it is one continuous world, except, of course, none of it really matters because all there is to do there is Hunts, there are no towns, and the way the rest of the game is designed. Basically, I got here and was like, "What the hell were they doing with the first half of the game?"
Nevertheless, it's needless to say that I'm enjoying the game immensely right now.
And regarding Versus XIII, while it doesn't have a chance of being a more traditional Final Fantasy (being by Nomura), outside of perhaps the use of the series staple music and mascots, I'm sure it will have a chance of being a little bit more of a customizable experience, at least in sidequests, in the same way that Kingdom Hearts, The World Ends With You, etc. were in that unique Nomura way.
Nevertheless, it's needless to say that I'm enjoying the game immensely right now.
And regarding Versus XIII, while it doesn't have a chance of being a more traditional Final Fantasy (being by Nomura), outside of perhaps the use of the series staple music and mascots, I'm sure it will have a chance of being a little bit more of a customizable experience, at least in sidequests, in the same way that Kingdom Hearts, The World Ends With You, etc. were in that unique Nomura way.
Fun Factor
Formerly FTWer
Amir0x said:see that's fine. I can respect that idea. Just not this idea that paradigms are better than gambits. It's just a more restricted gambit system.
The idea that you can still have fun anyway, even though it's more restrictive, is fine though. No objections
Class is dismissed!
What?
Gambits were about spending 10 minutes in the menus managing the a.i. for one area, so you could do absolutely nothing when you do actually play. How do you consider that better?
With Paradigms, you have to be constantly on alert & changing your strategy on the fly non-stop. It's by far the most involved & best battle system in the FF series.
I'll say it again too, the A.I. isn't perfect 100% of the time, but I'd take it over any game where I would manually & redundantly spend half the time in the menus, setting up the A.I. to basically do what they could do normally by themselves.
B-Rad Lascelle
Banned
Stock up on maxed-out Witch's Bracelets... 2 per character should suffice.ULTROS! said:Mission 62 is hard. Any tips?
One Raktavija is hard enough, but two?
Isolate one of the
Raktavija
Employ Snow as a Sentinel if your defense is otherwise lacking, but I found getting 5 stars to be easier if I went all out on offense and had Vanille equipped with the Healing/Physician's Staff for rapidfire healing when needed.
Once staggered, use Army of One with Lightning to max out the Stagger meter and then pummel them to oblivion with a Cerberus formation.
Employ both shrouds at the start, but I figure at this point that should be obvious.
FTWer said:
You're confusing paradigm implementation to what we're discussing, which is individual Paradigm functionality for teammates.
Paradigms are just gambits with zero player input. What we're discussing is Paradigms which are designed by the player. This way, you can keep your "constantly changing strategy" system while implementing the gambits factually superior way of A.I. designing.
What we're discussing is a merging, where a player custom designs a paradigm using a gambit-like system, and then it is implemented into the battle system like FFXIII, so you can switch between a series of paradigms (which would now include your custom designed one).
Paradigms are inferior to gambits because it's just Gambits with mediocre developer designed A.I. The implementation of paradigms into the battle structure appears to be what you and everyone else are actually preferring. Which is fine, because no one here takes offense to that.
Nonetheless, I do absolutely nothing when I play FFXIII's battle system and since I had no hand in designing the paradigms, I reaaally do absolutely nothing. And I five star everything. It's totally rad, watching paint dry.
But, I think our theoretical way of doing things is indisputably superior. It allows the same level of battle speed, the same strategy switching and focus on controlling the main character, but it implements a level of customization and A.I. tweaking that is simply unable to be matched in FFXIII. And it's sorely lacking in this game.
Additionally, because like always it's clear you just ignore points you don't like and probably you have issues reading, the proposed system we're discussing would allow you to play FFXIII -exactly- the same way if you were so lazy. You could simply continue using the mediocre designed pre-set Paradigms and you could beat the game that way. We'd simply have this other option for people who like to play their games.
IronFistedChampion
Member
This is exacty what I did, fuck! Should I man up and keep going or should I just reload a previous gamesave from the beginning of Pulse?Zzoram said:
Hmm you made me break my 'no more than one big post a day' rule. -_-
The AI isn't as mediocre as you say it is, it's a good all-round configuration that works fine for practically every encounter I've had. If I would start with a blank slate and program the AI myself, I would come to the same priorities in the best case scenario. This is probably because enemy behaviour is partially programmed and tested to match with the same existing role behaviour configuration. To allow worse custom AI configurations, they would have to tune down the overall difficulty level of the game like in FFXII.
The benefit of adding an extra layer of complexity for those rare occasions where a custom setup would outperform the standard role configuration simply isn't worth the confusion.
The whole point of the role system is to make the programming of AI obsolete and in that it succeeded.
The flow of the game would break if the game gives you the option to pauze the battle to customize roles. You could provide a system to create custom priorities for every role before battle and select them like you do with the default roles but it would make the system overly complex and confusing for most people.Amir0x said:
When a player gets stuck, is he supposed to use a different combination of roles or customize them? My guess is most people would fuck that up so hard that they would have to lock the feature untill postgame.Amir0x said:
The AI isn't as mediocre as you say it is, it's a good all-round configuration that works fine for practically every encounter I've had. If I would start with a blank slate and program the AI myself, I would come to the same priorities in the best case scenario. This is probably because enemy behaviour is partially programmed and tested to match with the same existing role behaviour configuration. To allow worse custom AI configurations, they would have to tune down the overall difficulty level of the game like in FFXII.
The benefit of adding an extra layer of complexity for those rare occasions where a custom setup would outperform the standard role configuration simply isn't worth the confusion.
The whole point of the role system is to make the programming of AI obsolete and in that it succeeded.
radiantdreamer
Member
_tetsuo_ said:
:lol this is sort of how I feel about Final Fantasy right now too.
I wants me some more Vagrant Story as well!
M°°nblade said:
You wouldn't break into your gambits mid-battle. It'd all be done before you enter a battle. You'd only be able to access your gambits again once the battle is complete.
Additionally, I don't care how confusing or "complex" a completely optional feature that you never have to use would be for people with the mental proficiency of a mustard seed. I'm not a retard and so I don't want my game features to cater to retards, ya know? Maybe I'm just idealistic.
M°°nblade said:
The ideal would be this.
You'd have the SAME SET of roles that you do in FFXIII currently. You can use those sets and play the game exactly as you do now. Literally, nothing would change if you don't want it to.
HOWEVER, for those who like, a "custom Paradigm" feature would open up. In it, you would select a "Gambit Role", which would limit your gambit customization to a set of core roles - magic users, debuff/buff, all out, stagger slow, etc. And within these "roles", you'd be given the full array of possible A.I. routines to trigger and mess around with so that the character would do precisely what you want in any situation should they choose that role.
You can mix and match your custom paradigms with the games pre-set paradigms if you like too.
For example, you could have your customized Ravager paradigm mix with the games pre-set Commando paradigm. There's no limits.
Or you can choose to only use the pre-sets and never mess around with the system. Your choice.
M°°nblade said:
Well we have a wide array of people who mention the same A.I. difficulties. So even if the A.I. is 'good enough' for your personal needs, it would be nice if they can include the options we desire since it would have no functional impact on your needs, but would dramatically impact ours.
In any event, it's just theoretical. But I can assure you, none of my custom configurations would be worse than the games. I already had fuck amazing gambit configurations in FFXII.
M°°nblade said:
It clearly didn't make the programming of A.I. obsolete.
Anyway, I don't get what it is with hardcore gamer's obsession with trying to white knight the honor of casual retards who get confused at the sight of two buttons, let alone gambit programming. Who the fuck cares if they get confused? It's a completely optional feature that you never have to use, and it improves the system by leaps and bounds. It allows control of all levels of play, while maintaining the option to go "casual" if you like and ignore it.
We're really coming up with amazing new ways to try to argue against pristine standards.
Scythesurge
Member
Yeah the game A.I. really could have benefited from some sort of programming. I love paradigm shifting, but not when it shifts into a SAB neglecting to attract attacks or a MED not reviving a fallen ally, etc.
My problem with the paradigms is that not only do you not get what you want first, in most cases, but the buffs for example are distributed evenly throughout the entire party so to get exactly what you want you have to wait which wastes time. There are many cases where I want my main attacker buffed and in a hurry while not necessarily needing anyone else buffed but the A.I doesn't allow for this.
The paradigms system just needs to be adjusted a little to allow more flexibility and to allow the gamer to decide what they want casted and on who. I mean, I lost count how many times Sazh casted Bravery on Vanille which was a complete waste of time.
The paradigms system just needs to be adjusted a little to allow more flexibility and to allow the gamer to decide what they want casted and on who. I mean, I lost count how many times Sazh casted Bravery on Vanille which was a complete waste of time.
The MED A.I sucks. Seriously, revival of your party should be top priority, closely followed by removing dangerous status effects (ex: Deprotect, Debrave etc...) but the dumb AI requires you to more or less be at perfect health before it will tend to anything else.Scythesurge said:
There are so many fights where it is so hard to stay alive under the deprotect status, especially later in the game.
Scythesurge
Member
Yeah the game really forces you to take things into your own hands a lot.Lightning said:
- Status
Similar threads
- Poll