It's not really arbitrary, though. If the content in the story quest is a certain level, than making the gate a level that allows you do have a chance against that content makes sense.
Yeah, I guess I would have just preferred more exploration as a part of the story missions, so there's some guidance. Not giving any guidance is fine when it's presented as optional side content, and that's how it is presented in the game, but it quickly turns out to not be so optional, leaving you forced to go do a lot of content that completely lacks any meaningful context.
Just a heads up, the subtitle of the Western OT will definitely be "1, 2, 3, 4, WOOOO!!"
Just a heads up, the subtitle of the Western OT will definitely be "1, 2, 3, 4, WOOOO!!"
So annoying. I kind of wish there was an option to remove Lyn and Tatsu from the game. I guess I'm just too old for this shit now. Either that or cutscenes with voice acting ruined this overly cutesy and dumb stuff in JRPGs for me.
Thanks, I appreciate it.My friend was working on it a bit, I think she did about half of it. Whenever I get time I'll try to finish it up. It's much less interesting, now that we can actually play the game.And it was extremely boring and a total of one thing happened.
So annoying. I kind of wish there was an option to remove Lyn and Tatsu from the game. I guess I'm just too old for this shit now. Either that or cutscenes with voice acting ruined this overly cutesy and dumb stuff in JRPGs for me.
Just a heads up, the subtitle of the Western OT will definitely be "1, 2, 3, 4, WOOOO!!"
I dunno about removing them, but yeah. It can be annoying. They were much more tolerable in the last to Affinity Quests I did (Refresh & Day in the Life of BLADE, I think). Not a single bad joke.
This is simply preference to design. You prefer a linear, slim structure for story progression, that's fine.
Just a heads up, the subtitle of the Western OT will definitely be "1, 2, 3, 4, WOOOO!!"
What about UH UH YEAH YEAH?I like this song, come at me
Yeah, from what I've been reading these have been my main concerns (along with the battle system, but I gave up on that part since the announcement, so wtv). Blade already had a pretty straightforward story compared to previous Xeno games (despite still being an amazing story), and this seems to be even more simple (while apparently still being an amazing story =P).
The required side stuff also bugged me, but then I remembered that I'll be doing side stuff anyway, so yeah.
I'm definitely one of those types of people. I loved how the story and area progression was linear in Xenoblade personally. The areas themselves were obviously non-linear in design so there was still great opportunities for exploration, but you had to progress from area to area in a linear fashion. I loved that and for me, the game never felt like you had to "explore 20% of first continent" to progress the story. That's just a bit silly to me. One of them incorporates exploration into the main story just by how it unfolds and one of them places a restriction on progressing in a story and popping up a box telling you that you have to explore more and do a heart-to-heart quest before you can continue. It's a little immersion breaking as well.
Even if Day in the Life of BLADE, it bothered me, but maybe I'm just more sensitive to it. The set up of Tatsu in the cliche "boke" comedy relief role and Lyn as the "tsukkomi" (and doubling as loli cute stuff for the... uh... "audience" that likes that kind of thing) for is just so apparent...
Monolith seems to have their desire to always include the "annoying kid and sidekick" characters. We had it in Xenoblade with Juju and Riki (and Reyn).
Kind of had it even in Xenogears now that I think about it, but I guess it didn't bother me because it was just text and a portrait with maybe a sound effect or two.
Kind of had it even in Xenogears now that I think about it, but I guess it didn't bother me because it was just text and a portrait with maybe a sound effect or two.
So errrrr... someone decided to make a video for Xenoblade X to the Gundam Wing intro song.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9u7dY0XqmHY
There are locations other than Primordia shown for those who don't want to see beyond that. No story spoilers though.
That's fine but that's the strength of a linear story structure. Try to take Xenoblade's world and layout and progression and story, and then try to put that over XCX's world. It wouldn't work because nothing, effectively, stops me from going to the High Entia in such a world except for a magical forcefield or going all the way to the Mechonis' head aside from some magic forcefield or wherever else I want to go which would break the lore entirely. When you make a connected, open world without story-blocks to impede progress, you can't really keep the story linearly structured. Imagine, for instance, trying to play FFIX but with the Invincible available from the moment you start the game... the story would break with a sickening crack because, while its framed in a huge world, said world is artificially tiered by impassable blocks that keep the world at large completely out of the player's reach until the important story elements are resolved. But in having this gated story and world, they can design a story around an evolution of and progression through the world. Much like Xenoblade.
That said Xenoblade had plenty of its own "do X for Y" within the story which on my recent play through felt like nothing but chores, its just that they were better hidden, like the aforementioned "fetch me x things to progress here". But I question this "non-linear in design" thing about Xenoblade, most of it was long corridors (dungeons) with interspersed map segments that were open-ish. I mean, take the iconic Gaur Plains, its huge but its still really just a long line with a bunch of divergent dead ends.
I don't think needing to explore to progress the story is necessarily any more immersion breaking than a pop-up with every quest that tells you "go here" or "find me x" that accompanied every Xenoblade quest.
When you make an RPG world that is truly seamless, then you really have to have different ways of tiering the story. Whether that be "You must be this tall to ride." or "You must have found Z McGuffing from Mt.Doom to progress on your journey further." or "You need to have seen X% of this world to move forward!", you can't just have what are effectively progress flags along the road of the map because a character/player can randomly end up there from exploring a seamless world. (As per the aforementioned, it would make zero-lore sense for me to end up on the Mechonis' head before the story ever even gets anywhere near there.) Its a sacrifice for the type of game and in this case, for the center piece of the game which is said seamless open world.
The Dolls really screw it up ever further in terms of narrative structure having a linear nature.
Monolith seems to have their desire to always include the "annoying kid and sidekick" characters. We had it in Xenoblade with Juju and Riki (and Reyn).
Kind of had it even in Xenogears now that I think about it, but I guess it didn't bother me because it was just text and a portrait with maybe a sound effect or two.
I mean, the map you posted of Gaur Plains still doesn't give me a "linear" vibe. Maybe partially because of how small of an image it is, but when you're exploring the area, it feels very non-linear. Lots of little paths you can take to find something, falling down into that spider infested area, or going up to the top level through other paths. FFXIII or an Uncharted game would be what I'd call linear level design. The area progression is linear in Xenoblade, but most of the areas were not (minus the places like maybe Ether Mines). We'll just have to disagree on that, I guess.
Nah.Just a heads up, the subtitle of the Western OT will definitely be "1, 2, 3, 4, WOOOO!!"
Since you have not yet mentioned the specifics of your praise for Blade, I can only assume you are referring to theories regarding its references to Monadic metaphysics and Gnostic forms of religion. Articles such as this one on the game's use of monadism to display "the death of the author" and this one analyzing the Gnostic trinity in the game seem like interesting pieces of analysis for the game. I'm impressed by the game's apparent hidden depths, but I can't quite see as how it "curb stomps" both Gears and Saga.This is not remotely true
Xenoblade curb stomps both saga and gears simplistic and literally interpereted use of their source materials to make a story thats more complex than simple surface face value.
Xenoblade left a far higher story bar for x to meet in regaurds to the complexity of the story.... And it wasnt even a xeno game.
The decade plus of experience definately shows.
Just a heads up, the subtitle of the Western OT will definitely be "1, 2, 3, 4, WOOOO!!"
Sounds a little disappointing tbh, but I have ridiculously high expectations for Takahashi games. Xenogears, Xenosaga ep1, Xenoblade were all amazing stories full of great characters and memorable plots. Xenoblade X from what I've played and your opinions seems like it's gonna be a lot more gameplay focused and less about going on a memorable rpg adventure with an interesting story.
Or maybe it's because I spent like $500+ for the game/hw bundle (and I doubt I'll use my JP-Wii U for much else since the system is practically dead already), so I'm expecting something that will blow me away like the original Xenoblade did (best jrpg of the PS3/X360/Wii 7 year generation by a mile).
I'm definitely enjoying Xenoblade X, but I have to try really hard to not compare it to Xenoblade when I play because it just makes me sad that so far most of the stuff I loved about Xenoblade are missing (though Xenoblade X has a lot of cool additions that Xenoblade didn't have). They're such totally different games, and Xenoblade X on its own seems like a great jrpg, just it's hard not to compare it to Xenoblade which had probably the most interesting jrpg setting in decades, and a cool story + beautiful locations & music.
FFXIII is a corridor game, its exceptionally linear. The reason I say that Xenoblade is linear is because it is gated, as per my examples with FFIX. The game is not a corridor-linear game (outside of its dungeons, a lot of them are straight lines, more or less) but when you look at how the game progresses, its done so in a point to point manner, like a line. You can verge off the beaten path for any particular map/segment but you cannot break out of the flow. I would frame FFXIII as, effectively, a glorified rail-shooter and Xenoblade (or a lot of older jRPGs) as a linear story in a linearly progressed world. They are linear to different degrees.
XCX is more along the lines of blending Skyrim quest structure for story progression with some JRPG/MMO elements. Western RPGs are all over the "complete quest for some guy" to progress story (like the character quests that progress the story here), which happens here a lot as well. The only weird one is the % exploration one which is like the "must be this level to do" sort of thing, straight from an MMO.
I think the %-thing may just be a bit of an oversimplification or oversight on the part of Monolith, they probably thought it was a non-issue and easy way to put some sort of clause on progression. That or, given the focus on exploring for the lore of NLA, they thought it was the best way to incorporate the "development of the settlement and growth" into gameplay mechanics. The latter seems reasonable.
Story and progression were linear but it opens up pretty quickly. If they had better quests it would've been more worth exploring the non-linear aspects, and seemed more linear than it should. I would definitely argue if raising your affinity level with the towns and doing side-quests was more worthwhile that it wasn't quite so simple to label it as linear.
But I think a disappointing aspect of what I've seen in Xenoblade X is that it's using its non-linearity as an excuse for not having more populated locations. I really dislike the fact that everything revolves around NLA, it doesn't look like a place interesting enough to constantly return to. I'll probably enjoy exploring these 5 grand landscapes at least, but I'm pretty disappointed that the setting looks to provide even less diversity than even the Bionis and Mechonis did. I guess I was wishing for something more in between, and the game didn't have to be linear to achieve that. I just hope it won't hamper my enjoyment of the game too much.
It was actually interesting reading the Iwata Asks. Towards the end Takahashi says with Xenoblade they finally hit the perfect balance between Y (story) and X (gameplay) [since his past games had too much story, not enough gameplay]
But then he goes on to say so this time with XB X they decided to focus even further on the X (gameplay), which begs the question of if you already had the perfect balance, why change the balance?
Just a heads up, the subtitle of the Western OT will definitely be "1, 2, 3, 4, WOOOO!!"
???I do think XBX signals Takahashi stepping back from hands on development.
Since you have not yet mentioned the specifics of your praise for Blade, I can only assume you are referring to theories regarding its references to Monadic metaphysics and Gnostic forms of religion. Articles such as this one on the game's use of monadism to display "the death of the author" and this one analyzing the Gnostic trinity in the game seem like interesting pieces of analysis for the game. I'm impressed by the game's apparent hidden depths, but I can't quite see as how it "curb stomps" both Gears and Saga.
Granted, I have very little authority to argue these games' narrative complexities, as all I have to judge them by are the rough summaries of both games/series that I've happened to be spoiled about. I'm just genuinely curious how these games can be so praised by many while you seem very adamant against their merit so an explanation would be really interesting to hear. It seems to me like an understandable, yet unnecessary, instinct to protect Xenoblade's equal (or greater, I wouldn't know as I haven't finished any other "xeno game") depth of narrative and artistic value against fans of the other two who reject the game unfairly as "not worthy of the xeno name" due to an over simplified perspective of believing the game to be simply a "shounen adventure story" they stuck to after first glance of the game.
I can understand the frustration, especially as I read this otherwise very enlightening and intriguing article analysing the first two "xeno" projects in depth. At reaching the fourth part I found the article switch from a fascinating investigation and presentation of the development of the "xeno" metaseries, into what appeared to be mostly an article focused on explaining just why Xenoblade is a "a cool game for gamers" but nothing more, even going so far as to vaguely assert the idea that video games inherently lack the ability for narrative depth, and that Takahashi and Soraya Saga would have had better success had they been able to make the story into a film, television, or novel series (which is obviously untrue given the use of Monadic theory/metaphysics to enhance the interaction between game and gamer with Blade).
I found this shift to be somewhat dissapointing, more so after reading the two earlier articles I linked to. But I would not blame anyone for having missed the message about monads and the way this weaves into the game's systems and narratives similarly to MGS2, after all I didn't have any real idea about the game's depth regarding this except for some mentioning of this in a far earlier Xenoblade X hype thread, (I think the poster may have been you). I of course had understood the game's gnostic influences after completing it, but the Monadic part is indeed very difficult to grasp at first. I can't anyone for being unable to see it unassisted. So instead of simply labeling such people as "unable to see the big picture" and leaving it at that, why not at least link them to such articles as the first two above.
For someone like me, who is relatively new to the discussion regarding all of these games (beat Xenoblade last year after starting the year before with a huge break between), it would helpful to spread the knowledge for newcomers, so that everyone can be brought into the discussion and understand the breadth of the story's focus. And to so concretely proclaim the first two "xeno" projects as simple plots without merit, without explanation seems similar to the arguments of the third article and its absolutist rejection of a great game and narrative. It does not set a good tone for enthusiastic discussion of any of the projects, and I am genuinely interested in what you have to say on the subject.
Since you have not yet mentioned the specifics of your praise for Blade, I can only assume you are referring to theories regarding its references to Monadic metaphysics and Gnostic forms of religion. Articles such as this one on the game's use of monadism to display "the death of the author" and this one analyzing the Gnostic trinity in the game seem like interesting pieces of analysis for the game. I'm impressed by the game's apparent hidden depths, but I can't quite see as how it "curb stomps" both Gears and Saga.
Granted, I have very little authority to argue these games' narrative complexities, as all I have to judge them by are the rough summaries of both games/series that I've happened to be spoiled about. I'm just genuinely curious how these games can be so praised by many while you seem very adamant against their merit so an explanation would be really interesting to hear. It seems to me like an understandable, yet unnecessary, instinct to protect Xenoblade's equal (or greater, I wouldn't know as I haven't finished any other "xeno game") depth of narrative and artistic value against fans of the other two who reject the game unfairly as "not worthy of the xeno name" due to an over simplified perspective of believing the game to be simply a "shounen adventure story" they stuck to after first glance of the game.
I can understand the frustration, especially as I read this otherwise very enlightening and intriguing article analysing the first two "xeno" projects in depth. At reaching the fourth part I found the article switch from a fascinating investigation and presentation of the development of the "xeno" metaseries, into what appeared to be mostly an article focused on explaining just why Xenoblade is a "a cool game for gamers" but nothing more, even going so far as to vaguely assert the idea that video games inherently lack the ability for narrative depth, and that Takahashi and Soraya Saga would have had better success had they been able to make the story into a film, television, or novel series (which is obviously untrue given the use of Monadic theory/metaphysics to enhance the interaction between game and gamer with Blade).
I found this shift to be somewhat dissapointing, more so after reading the two earlier articles I linked to. But I would not blame anyone for having missed the message about monads and the way this weaves into the game's systems and narratives similarly to MGS2, after all I didn't have any real idea about the game's depth regarding this except for some mentioning of this in a far earlier Xenoblade X hype thread, (I think the poster may have been you). I of course had understood the game's gnostic influences after completing it, but the Monadic part is indeed very difficult to grasp at first. I can't anyone for being unable to see it unassisted. So instead of simply labeling such people as "unable to see the big picture" and leaving it at that, why not at least link them to such articles as the first two above.
For someone like me, who is relatively new to the discussion regarding all of these games (beat Xenoblade last year after starting the year before with a huge break between), it would helpful to spread the knowledge for newcomers, so that everyone can be brought into the discussion and understand the breadth of the story's focus. And to so concretely proclaim the first two "xeno" projects as simple plots without merit, without explanation seems similar to the arguments of the third article and its absolutist rejection of a great game and narrative. It does not set a good tone for enthusiastic discussion of any of the projects, and I am genuinely interested in what you have to say on the subject.