That's a lot of words to hate on a game.
There weren't many words of mine in that post, though, and more importantly, I don't hate Shining in the Darkness. If I hated SitD, I wouldn't have played it long enough to finish the first floor, after all! It is kind of boring, and gameplay is 100% repetitive grind, but it's playable, and can be satisfying to get a bit farther each time. Of course the good artwork and music helps as well. After a while the tedium and repetition got to me, but it's not bad, just mediocre.
I actually agree with both IrishNinja and ABF. Grinding is boring, but Shining in the Darkness has enough other redeeming qualities to make it worth the effort.
What other redeeming qualities?
it can be! for me, much like practicing in fighting games over & over...it's always boring when there's no hook for you!
The difference is that even if it's very repetitive, practicing in a game like a fighting game (or strategy game) actually requires skill. What in grinding in an early-'90s console RPG requires skill like that? There usually isn't any kind of customization system, battle systems are extremely simplistic, etc... there is skill involved, in the magic systems and such, but to generalize, it's mostly VERY basic stuff outside of boss fights, and you don't grind in fights like those, usually! I know this does not apply to all games, but it does apply to many. Games can potentially be fun despite that, but it's a real issue for me.
Um. No.
Xenogears? Wat? The hardest battles in Xenogears are mech battles and you can't grind your way out of them. I mean literally. Your gear stats are determined by upgrades, not your character's levels. Xenogears is the anti-thesis of grindy.
I am not a Shining in the Darkness hater but your argument is ridiculous.
I don't have and haven't played Xenogears, but yeah, given how linear it's supposed to be that makes sense. It is something I've wanted to try, but just never have gotten it...
uhm, yes - i should've said "nearly" but i thought it obvious
What you said is what you said, and it wasn't accurate.
On a related note, (name an RPG) and there is someone out there who will say that it doesn't actually really require grind. Dragon Quest games? Not grindey, to some. I'd disagree, but it is clearly a term which can change from person to person, presumably based on whether they are having fun or not.
there are a number of RPG's you can coast through without grinding (suikoden 1/2, Lunar, etc) but the further back you go, the more common it is that you'd have to
my point is if you think grinding is by nature boring, late 80s/early 90s RPGs - particularly dungeon crawling ones - are gonna be rough on you
This is true, yes.
and you're cherry picking,
Pointing out that one of your three examples is wrong isn't cherrypicking, though.
but no, it's not ridiculous.
Do you have a case for SitD beyond "I like grind, the graphics are good, and I like the franchise"? That's not much of an argument, you know...
fucksake, ABF just pointed at the worst ports in the series as his favorites,
I didn't mention any ports though, and I didn't say favorite; I said 'most played'. That is an entirely different statement. And if you mean games and not ports, Shining Soul 1 and 2 are fun little action-RPGs, perfectly decent games. They're not great, but aren't bad either; just fun, above-average games. And Shining Force Neo is a surprisingly good Diablo-ish action-RPG. Quite like that one, really. Its sequel Shining Force Exa is about as good, I think, though I've played the first one a lot more.
If you want a not so good Shining action-RPG, play the other PS2 Shining action-RPG series, Shining Tears. Tears is kind of bad, it disappointed me compared to SF Neo. I do have its Japan-only sequel Shining WInd, but haven't played it. It looks mostly similar to the first one though.
then praised Shining Force II - not only another genre, but a game you damn sure have to grind a bit in
It's a strategy game though, so you actually have to use thought, strategy, etc. to play Shining Force II. It's really fun, great game. And as far as I know the game is no Disgaea, it's not a grind mountain.
ABF, i'm not going tit-for-tat with you on multiple forums, man - i've seen you argue Cruisin USA > Daytona.
I most certainly have never said that. You must be forgetting something. I have said that Cruis'n USA and its sequels is one of the most successful arcade racing game franchises ever and surely is right up there with Daytona USA on the list of most popular and successful arcade racing games (in North America, specifically), but that's not a quality argument; while Cruis'n is amusing fun, of course Daytona is the vastly superior game.
i find Shining in the Darkness delightful, as do others, hence why it's a classic. Shining: The Holy Ark in particular has been the best dungeon crawler i've played since Phantasy Star 1, and that's including the classic SMT games.
you're welcome to disagree; doesn't change a thing
You haven't presented a case for why people should agree with you that SitD is good. It would be nice if you would.
