Lost Odyssey

[Tom_B]

6/10 from GamesRadar US. It's a shocking review with a barely disguised anti-jRPG agenda and so many glaring factual inaccuracies I don't know where to start. Plus there's one or two lines that have me convinced that he's only played the first disc. Absolutely terrible piece of writing.

Wow.

I have to say, I'm midway through the third disc, and I'm nowhere near as enamoured with it as I once was. The hammy voice acting, the ludicrous plot, and the shallow antagonist all come to the fore, as the balance tips in favour of lengthy exposition. I guess I was expecting the game to have opened up a bit by now, but it's become even more linear (it hasn't even allowed me to explore the overworld yet)... And it keeps on doing that JRPG thing where, during an extended cutscene, it will hand control back to you and let you walk about five steps forward, then carry on where it left off - my pet peeve.

I'll try to stick with it to the end, but at times it feels like a hell of a chore...

[The Bag]

8.8 and a good review from game trailers http://www.gametrailers.com/player/30356.html

[Sprite Machine]

Are you playing through the game right now too?

Wouldn't it be hard to judge how reasonable the review is without playing through the majority of the game.

Er, no. I'm not judging the review's accuracy, just the points it raises and the information it puts across.

I would like to know if it's completely wrong, however. I have my eye on the game due to the love-in it seems to be getting, but I've been burned in that way before...

[Rudderless]

Don't leave us in the dark, then. What are the errors?

It seemed like a reasonable review to me. The other side of the coin, admittedly, but that's the point.

It's not much to do with the opinion he's expressing (I've acknowledged in my own review that it's flawed) as the tone in which it's written, and the clear contempt for anything within the genre that's not a Final Fantasy game, as if they're the only jRPG series worth a damn. Plus, anyone who describes the dream sequences so dispassionately ("ten pages of text" indeed) is clearly a bit wrong in the head.

Lost Odyssey takes about 8 hours to get past the training dungeon and even then, you’re still triggering long cutscenes and tutorials at least once every 15 minutes.

It'd only take 8 hours to get past the training dungeon if you had it on the pause screen for about five of them. The tutorials are skippable.

Elsewhere in the review he totally overexaggerates the importance of the rings - they're useful but it's not essential to swap between every battle, as he claims. Oh, and apparently RPGs should have moved on from magic. The plot's hardly convoluted either - any idiot could follow what's going on. And the load times aren't nearly as tortuous as he suggests.

He's also contradictory about the combat - praising it for its strategic complexity, but then saying that it's an over-complicated game that's not as accessible as FF.

[Sprite Machine]

It's not much to do with the opinion he's expressing (I've acknowledged in my own review that it's flawed) as the tone in which it's written, and the clear contempt for anything within the genre that's not a Final Fantasy game, as if they're the only jRPG series worth a damn. Plus, anyone who describes the dream sequences so dispassionately ("ten pages of text" indeed) is clearly a bit wrong in the head.

It'd only take 8 hours to get past the training dungeon if you had it on the pause screen for about five of them. The tutorials are skippable.

Elsewhere in the review he totally overexaggerates the importance of the rings - they're useful but it's not essential to swap between every battle, as he claims. Oh, and apparently RPGs should have moved on from magic. The plot's hardly convoluted either - any idiot could follow what's going on. And the load times aren't nearly as tortuous as he suggests.

He's also contradictory about the combat - praising it for its strategic complexity, but then saying that it's an over-complicated game that's not as accessible as FF.

So, for the most part, you just don't share his opinion. You've also misread what he said about the rings.

Thanks for the info on the training bit, though. Seems he overlooked something there.

[Rudderless]

You've also misread what he said about the rings.

I've not. He claims that without them it's like fighting naked, which is nonsense. The boost they add to your attacks isn't significant enough to make such a massive difference to having the 'wrong' ring equipped. Using a spell of the right element is a much more influential factor in how much damage is dealt.

Thanks for the info on the training bit, though. Seems he overlooked something there.

As well as forgetting the name of the Pipots ('rabbits in pots') and claiming Grand Staff is 'a building that makes meteors fall onto things' (please), to name but two examples of his general ignorance.

It's just a poor review, no two ways about it. Not quite sure why you're trying to defend it.

[Uzi]

Yeah the rings aren't a huge deal.

Of course Sprite would know this if he played it

[Raff]

I'm struggling to notice any difference at all in using different rings.

[Janski]

They're used for elemetntal damage to enemies in combat - Am i missing something?

[Uzi]

They're used for elemetntal damage to enemies in combat - Am i missing something?

Like any accessory in RPG's that might be +15% fire damage or something.

Theres nothing significant about them bar the implementation.

[Tom_B]

I'm struggling to notice any difference at all in using different rings.

They get a bit more useful later on, but spells do much more damage, it's usually more effective to have your big hitters on the front row all defending to try and keep the GC barrier thingy higher for a bit longer.

Oh, and as far as I know, Grand Staff really is just a big 'superweapon' that makes meteors fall on things...

[Talk Show Host]

I'm struggling to notice any difference at all in using different rings.

The damage certainly seems to pump up when the right ring is applied to the right type of enemy. They also have many effects (like poison) which can save you the time of casting. I would say they are a nice addition (as well as being able to re-equip in combat) but the battle system does not rely heavily on them.

[Rudderless]

I'm struggling to notice any difference at all in using different rings.

There's a slight boost if they have an elemental nature that's strong against a particular enemy, while some allow you to see your enemies' HP or what they're carrying. Some are strong against mechanical foes, others against beasts. But it's not as if they double the wodge of energy your attacks take off the enemy HP - most of the time I equipped rings with enhanced defensive qualities or side effects like the ones mentioned above. It's certainly useful to know how much your opponents have left in them.

[Rudderless]

They get a bit more useful later on, but spells do much more damage, it's usually more effective to have your big hitters on the front row all defending to try and keep the GC barrier thingy higher for a bit longer.

Oh, and as far as I know, Grand Staff really is just a big 'superweapon' that makes meteors fall on things...

Admittedly, that's just something I picked up on as a poor description rather than it being incorrect. It's a giant conduit for magic energy, basically.

[Sprite Machine]

I've not.

Sorry, you said: "they're useful but it's not essential to swap between every battle, as he claims", when he didn't claim that. He said: "After every other battle or so, you’ve got to halt, open up the menu and start tweaking away and forging new rings. Failure to keep up this maintenance screws you when you get to a boss".

It's just a poor review, no two ways about it. Not quite sure why you're trying to defend it.

Uhh, I'm not. I'm trying to understand what factual inaccuracies there are in it. Simply not agreeing with his take on the game is not one of them.

As well as forgetting the name of the Pipots ('rabbits in pots') and claiming Grand Staff is 'a building that makes meteors fall onto things' (please), to name but two examples of his general ignorance.

That's better.

[Raff]

Oh, and as far as I know, Grand Staff really is just a big 'superweapon' that makes meteors fall on things...

They think the meteor was caused by magic energy leaking from it, and so the gang are sent to it to find out why it is leaking and why the people there have stopped communicating.

[Tom_B]

They think the meteor was caused by magic energy leaking from it, and so the gang are sent to it to find out why it is leaking and why the people there have stopped communicating.

I know that's the reason you're sent there, but even in that first cutscene, it's fairly obvious that it's something Gongora is using to be all evil and shit, wasn't it?

[Taurus]

Failure to keep up this maintenance screws you when you get to a boss.

That's a factual inaccuracy, for example.

[Rudderless]

That's a factual inaccuracy, for example.

Cheers. I couldn't be bothered arguing the toss by that stage.

[GViper]

I've just read that games radar one too = HORRIBLE!

Tack on way too many long cutscenes (many of which are back-to-back), plus some cheap thrills aimed at adventure gamers (sneaking missions, puzzles), and some players might begin feeling downright insulted by Lost Odyssey.

Hang on a minute, didn't FF7 have both stealth sections, and puzzles. And on the puzzle front, doesn't EVERY traditional JRPG have a puzzle in the dungeons? I'd hardly wager the cutscenes are too long, it's actually quite nice and breaks up the old formula of running / combat better.

It doesn’t help matters that the load times are ridiculously long. And just when you think you can finally get down to some real adventuring, Kaim will look at something and cry, triggering a cutscene about his memories.

Oh my god, here we go again. If your loads times are too long, it's your Xbox. Quite simple really. Yes, it's not super fast or anything, it's just plain average. It never made me think, oh ffs loading.

And Kain is hardly as emo as even Squall in FF8.

Anyways, thats me done.

[Sprite Machine]

That's a factual inaccuracy, for example.

"Screws you" isn't a fact. Unless he meant it literally...

[Rudderless]

"Screws you" isn't a fact. Unless he meant it literally...

Stop being an arse. It's clear what he means by it, and if the bosses "screw" you, it's your own ineptitude rather than the game's fault.

Also, thanks for that post GViper - reminded me of another inaccuracy. Kaim doesn't cry when he remembers something.

Do we need to find more, Sprite Machine, or is that enough for now?

[Sprite Machine]

Stop being an arse.

There's no need to be rude.

It's clear what he means by it...

I gathered from it that it makes bosses very hard to beat.

..and if the bosses "screw" you, it's your own ineptitude rather than the game's fault.

The 'fault' is a matter of opinion.

Also, thanks for that post GViper - reminded me of another inaccuracy. Kaim doesn't cry when he remembers something.

Do we need to find more, Sprite Machine, or is that enough for now?

You don't 'need' to do anything. You were the one who brought it up. I was curious as I haven't played the game, but you seem more eager to discredit the review because it doesn't agree with your own analysis. I've been very civil, and I don't appreciate your tone.

[Tom_B]

I've been very civil, and I don't appreciate your tone.

Hah, that's nothing. I post on another forum and the 'Xbox 360 JRPG Fanclub', whilst small in number, make up for it with sheer venom towards anyone who dares question their beloved 'Sakaguchi-san'. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if these overly negative reviews* are just trying (and succeeding) to get a rise out of people, and therefore more hits. Who's ever heard of the US Games Radar anyway...?

* I would mention another, more major, website that gave it 2.5/5, but I fear for Hero of Canton's blood pressure...

[Rudderless]

I gathered from it that it makes bosses very hard to beat.

But - as Taurus also says - that's simply not true.

The 'fault' is a matter of opinion.

Well, he's basically saying it's the game's fault that you have to look after your party, and if you don't, you get 'screwed'. That might be an opinion, but it's a ridiculous one given that pretty much every RPG since time immemorial requires you to do the same, and it's not as if the bosses are difficult.

but you seem more eager to discredit the review because it doesn't agree with your own analysis. I've been very civil, and I don't appreciate your tone.

I'm discrediting the review because it's a bad review which is poorly written and contains several errors which I and a couple of others who've played the game have pointed out over the course of the past couple of pages. I'm not sure why you're so eager to pick holes in my comments, particularly given that you've not played the game. There's been a tone to your posts, too.

[Rudderless]

Hah, that's nothing. I post on another forum and the 'Xbox 360 JRPG Fanclub', whilst small in number, make up for it with sheer venom towards anyone who dares question their beloved 'Sakaguchi-san'. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if these overly negative reviews* are just trying (and succeeding) to get a rise out of people, and therefore more hits. Who's ever heard of the US Games Radar anyway...?

* I would mention another, more major, website that gave it 2.5/5, but I fear for Hero of Canton's blood pressure...

I've read reviews of LO with similar scores, but I took umbrage to the tone of this particular review, not to mention the noticeable faults. I'd be surprised if he played all four disks. If it was just a difference of opinion, I wouldn't have mentioned it.

Please also bear in mind that the FF series means very little to me. I've played a few jRPGs in my time, but I'm no Sakaguchi fanboy.

[Sprite Machine]

But - as Taurus also says - that's simply not true.

Well, he's basically saying it's the game's fault that you have to look after your party, and if you don't, you get 'screwed'. That might be an opinion, but it's a ridiculous one given that pretty much every RPG since time immemorial requires you to do the same, and it's not as if the bosses are difficult.

I appreciate your opinions on the matter but I was specifically responding to your initial claim that the review was full of falsehoods. You've pointed out about two fairly small ones, while the rest are just different points of view.

I'm not sure why you're so eager to pick holes in my comments, particularly given that you've not played the game.

It's not 'picking holes' to want you to elaborate on your claims and point out when you don't. It's specifically that I haven't played the game that I want to be informed about it. You've made yourself clear now, though. I'm sorry if you thought I had some other motive or intention.

[Rudderless]

I appreciate your opinions on the matter but I was specifically responding to your initial claim that the review was full of falsehoods. You've pointed out about two fairly small ones, while the rest are just different points of view.

I've picked more than two, and the others are more than just different points of view. Read GViper's post above - some of his criticisms are completely invalid. Having a go at an RPG for containing puzzles when a very large percentage of them also do - including the FF series which he compares LO to - is just criticism for criticism's sake.

It's not 'picking holes' to want you to elaborate on your claims and point out when you don't. It's specifically that I haven't played the game that I want to be informed about it.

There are plenty of opinions in this thread and elsewhere - quite a few of which are just as negative as the GamesRadar review. I highlighted that one purely to encourage people to pay it no attention.

[Sprite Machine]

I've picked more than two, and the others are more than just different points of view.

No, they're not. It appears you don't understand what a fact/falsehood actually is.

Read GViper's post above - some of his criticisms are completely invalid. Having a go at an RPG for containing puzzles when a very large percentage of them also do - including the FF series which he compares LO to - is just criticism for criticism's sake.

None of them are falsehoods, however unfair you think they may be.

[GViper]

I think people need to review it in terms of a JRPG. If you're expecting mega faced paced the whole way through, you won't get it. The game has a WONDEROUS storyline, a battle system that is pretty ace so far, with a great shakycam, gears of war style effect as they run up to hit enemies, and endearing characters! Even Kaim, although if you don't read the dreams, you lose a lot of him as a character.

Nitpicking and Sakaguchi-bashing to get a rise as someone suggested I think will be the name of the game.

EDIT - and to you two bloody arguing, it doesn't matter if it's factually accurate, or just made redundant by his useless and uneducated points. Either way, he was not a very well informed reviewer. Now, if he said the puzzles lack passion, and actually commented on them, or something I'd be far more inclined to listen to his opinion, rather than that puzzles were included to appeal to adventure gamers, which is a load of old tosh.