Doesn't surprise me that it's pushed back. The fall/winter is busy as is and any sort of sales Alter Code: F would get would be eaten up by the compeition.
To anyone whose played it, have they messed with the soundtrack? The original's soundtrack is in my top ten of all time, and I hope they left it alone.
As I recall, Naruke remixed a few tracks to add a few things to a few tracks (and of course it's higher quality) but the primary composition remains the same.
one of the biggest misconceptions of the early playstation days. WA is a good RPG like toshinden is a good fighter.
So that would make FF7 the equivalent of Eternal Champions?
Every past RPG can be seen as "good but for it's time". The quality of a game is also (and most of the time) related to the times of it's original release.
The problem with measuring games by the time it was originally released is that it creates skewed views and an easy excuse to fall back on. If anything, games (especially RPGs) should be judged on what it does and how well it did it. Some of the more superfluous to judging a game's quality (like graphics and sound quality can be left out with a few exceptions.
yeah, but the point is that wild arms was hella mediocre and derivative when it came out, but everyone ignored that and talked about how awesome it was for some reason. i totally remember being bored off of my ass by the story and the mind-numbingly simplistic battles.
the puzzle elements just ripped off lufia II but did a half-assed job, and all in all it was a 7/10 at best, *at the time*. but it's held up to be some sort of amazing classic of the PS' early lifespan, and people are always confused when the new games aren't so hot.
Deriative? Yes. Mediocre? Hardly. If anything, the game holds up fairly well as a game even today except for the battle graphics which make the game reallly hard to play now (this was the exception I was talking about above). All the prinicpal elements of the game were done quite well. It did battles, dungeons, and story just as good as any RPG that came before it, if not better in some regards. Heck, the puzzle element that it ripped off from Lufia II was still well done (and comparing any RPG to Lufia II in this area makes them look half-assed anyway).
The reason the two sequels were lackluster (desptie the fact I liked both games, I do recognize they have problems) have nothing to do with the first game at all. It has to do with the choices the designers of the games made as opposed to anything the first game setup. I can write a nice, fat post for you (perhaps the same length as my Growlanser posts) on it if you'd like. =b
I actually enjoyed WA1 all the way through - derivative isn't the end of the world when you can consistently execute it. The story wasn't breaking any boundaries either, but was more intelligible than Legend of Mana and Chrono Cross put together.
Yep, most people think that deriative = bad game. It isn't always the case. It just happens that the worst games are deriative and that games with derivative elements get a fat generalization attached to them. And yeah, the story wasn't breaking any grounds but it certainly was better than a lot of games that can before and after it.
It's the other games in the series that confuse me - WA2 has the worst localization I've ever heard of, worse than such 'classics' as Robotrek and Secret of the Stars, while WA3 is basically an attempt to simplify the first game with some bizarre gameplay downgrades.
WA2's localization was atrocious but even if it did get a good localization, the game still had problems (and good points). This was thanks in part to the incredible stupid second disc of the game. WA3 had some really stupid things about it (like the second half of the game which had the same problem was Wild Arms 2, but if anything it did an excellent job in other areas. A lot of people thought WA3 had too simplistic of a battle system but simply never investigated the options given to the player and how well it worked. In fact, the customization found within the seemingly limited systems is unparalleled in most Console RPGs.
I think WA3 is the weakest of the series. I liked it, but it's kind of lacking in anything special to help it stand out. The other two games are a little more polished and interesting.
WA2 is my favorite of the series (I can manage to overlook the awful localization), though I haven't played the remake of WA1 yet.
Personally, WA2 > WA3 > WA1 however, based on quality. WA1 > WA3 > WA2.
