Shake Appeal
Member
The things he says about a 12 year-old girl aren't easily dismissed as "questionable," for me.Yea I haven't even played SC and was about to say, wouldn't be Olivier without some questionable comments!
The things he says about a 12 year-old girl aren't easily dismissed as "questionable," for me.Yea I haven't even played SC and was about to say, wouldn't be Olivier without some questionable comments!
More accurately (if this can't already be guessed by "B button") it's the cancel button. But yeah, this isn't one of those games where you have to suffer long text scroll.One thing: You can definitely skip text. It's the B button on an Xbox controller. Tap to skip one line, hold to quickly fast forward through text.
One thing: You can definitely skip text. It's the B button on an Xbox controller. Tap to skip one line, hold to quickly fast forward through text.
The things he says about a 12 year-old girl aren't easily dismissed as "questionable," for me.
The things he says about a 12 year-old girl aren't easily dismissed as "questionable," for me.
Not to mention that anything Olivier says is a) hard to take seriously and b) is immediately shot down by Estelle or someone else.It's good to remember that age of consent is not universal between cultures, and that Japanese attitudes on that subject are different from typical Western attitudes.
Here's my combined review of FC and SC - please check it out:
Steam Spotlight: The Legend of Heroes: Trails in the Sky
Uh, why would you nonchalantly drop a giant FC ending spoiler in a review that purports to review both games? I haven't finished FC yet.
AFAIK I didn't mention anything about SC's story that isn't in the OP of this thread. The premise of a game is not a spoiler. It just isn't. But it definitely wouldn't be wise to read a review of something if you didn't want to know the premise.
The premise of SC kind of is a spoiler when you advertise that the review is for both games (which resulted in him/her thinking that story-wise you wouldn't cover more than the beginning of FC). After all, a video game review is traditionally used to form a purchase decision - and for someone who wants to know whether or not FC and SC are worth playing it's quite a big blow when you just reveal the ending twist of FC. If you think it's necessary to reveal SC's premise (why though? If you treat FC and SC as one big game it makes absolutely no sense to reveal something that happens midgame), you could have just wrote two separate reviews. Or you could have written a small warning that you'll spoil the ending of FC, despite it being a review that is supposed to cover both FC and SC.
I didn't talk about the twist at all. The only way the story description could be any more vague would be if I left the character's name out. But that takes away the bit of continuity the reader needs to follow what vague story overview I'm even providing. I love you guys, but when people start to get cray-cray about spoilers, IMO it's better to try to steer them in the right direction instead of just arriving at the point where literally nothing can be discussed.
I just don't get the thought process between covering two games in one review but then dropping something that is an obvious spoiler for people who haven't yet played one of the games. If you want to cover two connected games in one review, it should be quite obvious that it's not a good idea to reveal too much about the second game's story, so that the review actually still remains useful for the people who aren't there just for the SC content.
I have considered that feedback, but again, it's not a spoiler. It's the premise. Any review of any game is likely to discuss story to some extent, including (of course) the premise. Anyone who has such a pointlessly broad definition of spoilers should abstain from reading reviews. This very thread's OP contains the exact same information, so you're being especially silly.
I have considered that feedback, but again, it's not a spoiler. It's the premise. Any review of any game is likely to discuss story to some extent, including (of course) the premise. Anyone who has such a pointlessly broad definition of spoilers should abstain from reading reviews. This very thread's OP contains the exact same information, so you're being especially silly.
I have considered that feedback, but again, it's not a spoiler. It's the premise. Any review of any game is likely to discuss story to some extent, including (of course) the premise. Anyone who has such a pointlessly broad definition of spoilers should abstain from reading reviews. This very thread's OP contains the exact same information, so you're being especially silly.
This game validated my habit of keeping multiple saves yet again!
Went through a story sequence, after which I decided to stop in at the guild branch, where I saw that a side quest I never even accepted had been failed (probably due to advancing the story too fast). So I loaded a save 10 minutes prior, before the story sequence, beelined to the guild branch, and hey, the quest is now available. Sorry story, walking around Liberl beating up monsters and picking up doodads takes priority!
Multiple saves, y'all.
You guys are crazy. I never missed a mission and I only had one save when I went through the game the first time, lol.
You guys are crazy. I never missed a mission and I only had one save when I went through the game the first time, lol.
Funnily enough it's because of noticing posts like yours that I was dancing around the spoilers. But logically no, if you're here then spoilers for the first game are fair game, much like any other sequel OT thread should be.I'm not sure why we're going on and on about FC spoilers in a thread about SC. I mean, honestly, people should just know better. If you're reading everything in a SC thread and trying to have a discussion while clicking on links posted in the thread, you're probably going to get spoiled on FC if you're not done with it. I was playing FC before I started SC, and I knew to mostly stay away from reading the thread.
I learned a very long time ago that relying on a single save in a lengthy game is asking for heartache one way or another.You guys are crazy. I never missed a mission and I only had one save when I went through the game the first time, lol.
I learned a very long time ago that relying on a single save in a lengthy game is asking for heartache one way or another.
Sheep are the worst animals that ever lived.
Sheep are the worst animals that ever lived.
Sheep are the worst animals that ever lived.
Glad to see I'm not the only one. I've been double/triple saving since the PS1, and I don't think that's ever going to change.
I don't know about THAT, but it is why I lament that so many games just want to run with a full auto save system. I appreciate that as a fail safe but it's nuts how some games don't seem to comprehend that people might want to manually save at a specific point. And in formats where it'd make more sense to do so, like RPGs!Because so much of my gaming history is RPGs (which are chockful of missables and/or bugs), I've been trained to save as a reflexive reaction. The idea of not using all the save slots available doesn't make sense to me.
Fucking karate sheep!
You guys are crazy. I never missed a mission and I only had one save when I went through the game the first time, lol.
That's not a penguin :v
There is no penalty for running away right? No loss of bp or rare items later in the game?
Nope, none whatsoever. You can run from every battle without fail save for plot-based fights and bosses, I think.
I like this.
I just fought a big group of monsters that confused my entire party in a single hit. I watched slowly as they all began killing each other. If I hadn't been able to run I would've been a dead dodo. And retry offset is for wimps.
There is no penalty for running away right? No loss of bp or rare items later in the game?
That's a known bug, but as you say, thankfully there's a relatively simple workaround.
So, 50 hours later, I've finished the game. From just a few hours into FC right up until the very end of SC, one thought has remained constant, and it's not one that many here will agree with.
Kinda-notreally-spoilery:Total-spoilery:The game would've been more enjoyable & original without the romance between E&J. The brother/sister dynamic was so much more interesting.Not much would needed to have changed. The scene on the beach after Joshua rescues Estelle from the Glorious... Why couldn't it be a sister telling her brother that their family loves him, and to stop being a bit of a tit and come home to her and them?
Speaking of bugs, I stumbled across a rather large one, apparently (spoilers).
I didn't get to fight Renne in the Axis Pillar, exactly the same as this guy/girl describes. Went straight from Lucciola to Loewe.
Thanks guys! Fixed that mention.
It's good to remember that age of consent is not universal between cultures, and that Japanese attitudes on that subject are different from typical Western attitudes.
Now that people are starting to finish the game, I'm curious what your thoughts on the ending are? (obviously SPOILERS). Mainly interested if people will feel like they need The 3rd after they finish SC.
I know I did.
Chapter 2 wrapped, I'd be annoyed that characters not in your party don't get exp except for the fact exp scales so it's easy to catch someone up, double if you win a shiny pom fight.
Also is the Odyssey of Anton achievement bugged? I'm pretty sure I met him for the first time in chapter 2 and yet the achievement unlocked?
Chapter 2 wrapped, I'd be annoyed that characters not in your party don't get exp except for the fact exp scales so it's easy to catch someone up, double if you win a shiny pom fight.
Also is the Odyssey of Anton achievement bugged? I'm pretty sure I met him for the first time in chapter 2 and yet the achievement unlocked?
Where did you meet him?