FF:Crystal Chronicles and Metroid ZM

[rgraves]

The game might be unplayable in its current form, but that's hardly the point. Conflict Desert Storm 2, when played with 4 requires team work, tactical discussions etc, joypads work perfectly fine. I'm sure it wouldn't take much effort to make CC playable with joypads.

The thing is, a big franchise is coming to the Gamecube - this could be the ideal opportunity to sell a few Gamecubes, which is something I'd expect Nintendo to be very keen to do. Final Fantasy is a massive franchise isn't it?

But instead, we've got a game with an incredibly limited market. But the point is, it's limited for no good reason.

I can't believe for one second that if it was joypad based it wouldn't be worth playing.

Surely I'm not the only one who would love to play this game, but doesn't have the hardware themselves, or doesn't know enough other people with them? I'd expect to be in the majority rather than the minority on this one.

The games was designed, from the ground up, to work with the GBA. It wouldn't be the same using a joypad, and they [Game Designers Studio] decided that the game they wanted to make was the one using the GBA. It's not limited for no good reason, it's limited for very good reasons - it's what makes the game what it is.

Do you think that Tekki should have been dumbed-down to work on the standard Xbox pad?

[Xevious]

I'm just miffed that in developing this they have completely ignored me (and I'll repeat the need for SPs with this rather than simple GBAs).

I play with my original GBA connected to the Gamecube on all sorts of games. Why is this any different?

[Xevious]

The game might be unplayable in its current form, but that's hardly the point. Conflict Desert Storm 2, when played with 4 requires team work, tactical discussions etc, joypads work perfectly fine. I'm sure it wouldn't take much effort to make CC playable with joypads.

The thing is, a big franchise is coming to the Gamecube - this could be the ideal opportunity to sell a few Gamecubes, which is something I'd expect Nintendo to be very keen to do. Final Fantasy is a massive franchise isn't it?

But instead, we've got a game with an incredibly limited market. But the point is, it's limited for no good reason.

I can't believe for one second that if it was joypad based it wouldn't be worth playing.

Surely I'm not the only one who would love to play this game, but doesn't have the hardware themselves, or doesn't know enough other people with them? I'd expect to be in the majority rather than the minority on this one.

I'm guessing you haven't actually played it then, and as such don't know about the play mechanics?

[rgraves]

How predictable.

rgraves blindly sticking up for a Nintendo product.

You'll excuse me if i don't fall off my chair, won't you?

Seriously, I can't believe the attitude here.  It's pathetic.

If anyone in this thread is blind, it's not me. It's not even a Nintendo product for a start....

[mdn2]

Steel Battalion is actually a very good example of something similar. No one complains because that is expensive or aimed at a specialist market (It's sequel even more so, being online only). Why can't people understand that if you don't know 2/3 people with a GBA, then this game probably isn't for you? I won't be getting it (I know a couple of people with GBA's, but it ain't their thing) but many people will. Just because it's not for you, let it go! Buy FFTA if you want to play FF on a Nintendo system.

[shynra]

I herd in the early test versions you could trick the gcn in to thinking that there where 4 gb conected by firt sorting out player 1, take out the controler put in gcn controler, then sort out player 2 e.t.c. et.c, you doint gt any of the stats on any other screen so your playing blind but its ment to be a way round it... unless it was taken out... anyway i got 3 gba

[Pug Fugly]

Okay fine.

All the hardcore games who buy a new GBA every time it comes out in a new colour, I hope you enjoy it. Although if the only reason it is any good is because you have to talk to the other players, I doubt you'll enjoy it that much.

Plus, I only mentioned Desert Storm 2 because of the 4 player co-op element. It works really well.

I still firmly believe that any information relayed via the GBA could be displayed on the screen. Maybe the experience would not be quite as good, but hey we'll never know now will we?

I think it's a real shame for two reasons:

1) Sales of the games and Gamecubes would be much better if the game were universally enjoyable. Something Nintendo (and their fans) would be keen on I imagine.

2) People like me, who would absolutely love to play it, simply can't (without spending large sums of cash, or asking the local kids around my house - not advisable for a 30 year old man )

Listen, I apologise for any nonsense spouted and offense caused. But I genuinely think too many of you are dismissing them too lightly. Also, are those the same people who will have the hardware to play it?

Also, would you be happy if Mario Kart:DD!! was only playable if each player had a Steering Wheel (as it would make the game better)? I wouldn't, I don't think you would either.

[amanset]

I herd in the early test versions you could trick the gcn in to thinking that there where 4 gb conected by firt sorting out player 1, take out the controler put in gcn controler, then sort out player 2 e.t.c. et.c, you doint gt any of the stats on any other screen so your playing blind but its ment to be a way round it... unless it was taken out... anyway i got 3 gba

You are my new favourite poster.

[Pug Fugly]

I'm guessing you haven't actually played it then, and as such don't know about the play mechanics?

Oh right sorry.

So I guess people never discuss games before they are released?

[Sprite Machine]

All the hardcore games who buy a new GBA every time it comes out in a new colour, I hope you enjoy it.

4 players. 4 GBAs.

Not really breaking the bank is it?

Although if the only reason it is any good is because you have to talk to the other players, I doubt you'll enjoy it that much.

Why?

Have you played it?

Plus, I only mentioned Desert Storm 2 because of the 4 player co-op element.  It works really well.

Then play that instead of a game that you can't play.

I still firmly believe that any information relayed via the GBA could be displayed on the screen.  Maybe the experience would not be quite as good, but hey we'll never know now will we?

I'd imagine the developers knew!

1) Sales of the games and Gamecubes would be much better if the game were universally enjoyable.  Something Nintendo (and their fans) would be keen on I imagine.

Yes, a shame. Ne'er mind.

2) People like me, who would absolutely love to play it, simply can't (without spending large sums of cash, or asking the local kids around my house - not advisable for a 30 year old man )

Then, again, don't play it.

Listen, I apologise for any nonsense spouted and offense caused.  But I genuinely think too many of you are dismissing them too lightly.  Also, are those the same people who will have the hardware to play it?

No, I have the hardware to play it, and even friends with GBAs, however I can't buy it because there simply wouldn't be enough oportunities to get my friends round for a game for it to be worth me buying it.

So I won't.

Also, would you be happy if Mario Kart:DD!! was only playable if each player had a Steering Wheel (as it would make the game better)?

Double Dash works without steering wheels.

[Pug Fugly]

Double Dash works without steering wheels.

I know it does, but I was just trying to come up with an example. I think you're purposely misunderstanding.

Chrystal Chronicles would work without GBAs - that seems pretty much undeniable, it's the level of compromise that is too be questioned. Maybe there'd me more stats on screen, and less need to converse. But it would still work.

Now, imagine if MK:DD!! was designed from the ground up to be used with steering wheels and pedals (just like CC was designed from the ground up to use GBAs)

We'd have exactly the same situation. A game that would work on joypads, but has been limited to people with 4 steering wheels because it works better that way. Surely you can understand what I'm saying?

It would be easy to make pretty much any game better if it was designed to be used with a specific hardware requirement.

[Sprite Machine]

Chrystal Chronicles would work without GBAs - that seems pretty much undeniable, it's the level of compromise that is too be questioned.

Eh?

No, it wouldn't work without GBAs. If a game were to be made that worked without GBAs, it wouldn't be FF:CC. That is the whole point.

Now, imagine if MK:DD!! was designed from the ground up to be used with steering wheels and pedals (just like CC was designed from the ground up to use GBAs)

We'd have exactly the same situation.  A game that would work on joypads, but has been limited to people with 4 steering wheels because it works better that way.  Surely you can understand what I'm saying?

If Double Dash was built from the ground up to work with steering wheels then it wouldn't be playable with control pads, just like FF:CC isn't playable with control pads (bar the shallow 1-player game) because it's been designed from the ground up to work with GBAs.

It would be easy to make pretty much any game better if it was designed to be used with a specific hardware requirement.

Yes, let there be more games that don't even require control pads! Or consoles! That'd be even easier! We could call them "thoughts" or something.

[Systemshock]

I play with my original GBA connected to the Gamecube on all sorts of games. Why is this any different?

Our main TV is in a fairly dark corner of our lounge. Even with all the lights on viewing a GBA screen is difficult to impossible - opening the curtains makes things worse with add reflection. I tried the GBA alot on ZTWW and found it useless. Did work ok with Animal Crossing but its main purpose there was to just open up Kapp'n.

[Pug Fugly]

No, it wouldn't work without GBAs. If a game were to be made that worked without GBAs, it wouldn't be FF:CC. That is the whole point.

No, it wouldn't be the FF:CC that currently exists.

But in fact, it would be. It would do all it does now. Plus, it would have the option to play it with joypads. See what I'm saying? For those with enough GBAs, the game would be as it is now. Those of us without the required no. of joypads could play the game with our info on screen instead. We'd still need to communicate, and I reckon we'd still enjoy the game.

I can see either you don't understand, or you're pretending you don't.

So tell me.

Tell me, if there was an option to allow the game to be played with joypads, and the GBA information displayed on the screen instead, what the game would be like. Don't tell me that isn't possible, or if so, tell me why. After all, a GBA offers no control options that a joypad does (considerably less in fact), the only difference being that you can have information being displayed on your own screen rather than the main screen.

What I'm saying is, using a GBA doesn't offer you any functionality that a joypad and a little corner of the screen wouldn't. Not like Steel Battalion where 130 controls (or whatever it is) simply can't be mapped to 1 (or even 3) normal joypad controllers.

What I would also say, is that FF:CC is an attractive enough proposition without resorting to such gimmicks. Something that couldn't be said for Steel Battalion.

[rgraves]

Now, imagine if MK:DD!! was designed from the ground up to be used with steering wheels and pedals (just like CC was designed from the ground up to use GBAs)

We'd have exactly the same situation. A game that would work on joypads, but has been limited to people with 4 steering wheels because it works better that way. Surely you can understand what I'm saying?

I see what you are saying, but your logic is slightly flawed. Using steering wheels for MKDD would add nothing that a normal controller couldn't already provide. A steering wheel is just a different way of inputting the same joypad commands (A, B, Left, Right etc). The key difference in this case, is that the GBA adds a second screen - something that the standard joypad alone couldn't possibly add.

[Sprite Machine]

Tell me, if there was an option to allow the game to be played with joypads, and the GBA information displayed on the screen instead, what the game would be like. Don't tell me that isn't possible, or if so, tell me why. After all, a GBA offers no control options that a joypad does (considerably less in fact), the only difference being that you can have information being displayed on your own screen rather than the main screen.

No, the difference being that other people can see your information, meaning there is no need for communication between players, which is kind of the whole point. It is a communicative game. If it were designed around controller and screen-space, it wouldn't be.

[blue swIIrl]

All the hardcore games who buy a new GBA every time it comes out in a new colour, I hope you enjoy it. Although if the only reason it is any good is because you have to talk to the other players, I doubt you'll enjoy it that much.

You don't need to have the GBAs yourself; you get your friends to bring theirs over when they come to play it. You can play this game one player without a GBA, and still enjoy it; think of the GBA multiplayer as the sweetest bonus ever.

And in regard to the talking thing; one of the best things about, say, Mario Kart, is being able to shout and laugh with a bunch of friends. This takes it to the next level: you have to talk in order to progress (as each player gets different information on their radar screen.) This game is the ultimate in co-op, something that many games have been missing.

What we have here is an incredible, innovative, visually stunning game. And if you don't like it, shut the hell up already.

[Hawkeye]

I think it's the use of the Final Fantasy name that's causing more upset over the game than the GBA connection.

If it was just called The Crystal Chronicles I doubt many would bat an eyelid. I never heard anyone complain about SB needing a huge controller that caused the game to cost £129, and could only be used for that single game. Was PSO a crap game because it only really came in to it's own once played on-line?

The game by all accounts is great fun multiplayer, while the single player seems to be average at best. They tried something new and to an extent it has worked, they have produced a good multiplayer RPG with a twist.

As I say drop the Final Fantasy from the title and the controversy disappears.

[blue swIIrl]

No, the difference being that other people can see your information, meaning there is no need for communication between players, which is kind of the whole point. It is a communicative game. If it were designed around controller and screen-space, it wouldn't be.

Plus everytime you wanted to change your command lists or use an item, you'd have to make everyone wait, spoiling the flow of the game. With the GBA, you can use items etc and your team mates can keep fighting. And at the start of each dungeon, it asks you to "prepare your command list". This takes maybe 3 or so minutes. With 4 players taking it in turns, then you've got a 12 minute wait before you can even start playing.

The GBA component isn't just a clever use of the GBA-GC connectivity, its pretty damn essential to keeping the game fun. And thats what games are meant to be, yes?

[Pug Fugly]

I see what you are saying, but your logic is slightly flawed. Using steering wheels for MKDD would add nothing that a normal controller couldn't already provide. A steering wheel is just a different way of inputting the same joypad commands (A, B, Left, Right etc). The key difference in this case, is that the GBA adds a second screen - something that the standard joypad alone couldn't possibly add.

Okay, what I'm saying then is that the information could go on the screen instead.

Cons: smaller game screen, less conversation.

Okay, but have you played Conflict Desert Storm 2 with 3 friends? Or Gauntlet Dark Legacy (which is poor, but with 3 friends it is good fun). Or Hunter? (I think that's what it is called).

All of these games display all the info on the main screen. All of these games also require, or at least stimulate, constant discussion of tactics etc... Laughing, berating, planning, it all goes on.

Plus, Gauntlet and Hunter aren't a million miles away from the kind of game FF:CC is trying to be are they? (albeit vastly inferior).

Using these games as evidence (two of which aren't even that good), I say that if the information is shared on screen, players will still communicate.

For me, the only disadvantage left becomes one of screen space, but to be honest I think that is a pretty trivial consideration really.

[Sprite Machine]

Okay, what I'm saying then is that the information could go on the screen instead.

Cons: smaller game screen, less conversation.

You're missing the point.

Communication is the game. Without it, the game is pointless.

[rgraves]

Pug, does this piece from Penny Arcade explain it any better for you??

First of all yes it is true that in order to play with four players each person needs their own GBA. While it might sound odd at first, in practice it ends up being fucking brilliant. Imagine that you are playing with three other people. If you haven’t seen the game it’s not played in split screen. Picture a game like Hunter or Zombie Revenge. You’re all on the same screen fighting monsters and picking up loot. Now imagine that you need to access your inventory so that you can equip a new spell you picked up. Were it not for the GBA’s you would have to pause the game in order to bring up your inventory. Meanwhile no one else in your party can do shit because your cycling through menu screens looking for that new Ice spell you just grabbed. That’s bullshit and it would never work.

Instead what happens is that you hit the select button on your GBA and immediately you have access to your entire inventory and character customization menus via the GBA screen. You can sit there and alphabetize your items if you want and you aren’t bothering anyone else. The game is continuing on without you and your character automatically moves to keep up with the rest of the party. The other thing it allows is for multiple people to be using their inventories at the same time. I can be dropping Money for one person while he is dropping a spell for me. Fucking brilliant! This sort of thing would never be possible without the GBA.

Square also uses the GBA connectivity in other cool ways. One person in your party will have access to the map of the level you are in. It’s random so you never know who will be the navigator from level to level. You’re also given goals via your GBA screen before levels begin. Certain things like “Only use magic to kill monsters” or “don’t pick up any items”. Everyone is graded at the end of the level according to how well they accomplished these goals and the people with the highest scores get first dibs on specific kinds of loot picked up by the party during the level.

As wonderful and fantastic and totally fucking bad ass Crystal Chronicles is I will say that I think someone will die because of this game. That’s right, I believe it is only a matter of time before someone kills their friend because of his or her actions in this game. Let me give you some examples of the sort of behavior I have seen spark fights among our own group.

One of the most common ways for a fight to break out is over what we refer to as “Dropping the bucket short.” In case you don’t know the world of Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles is poisoned and your party carries with it a magical container (the bucket). This container creates a magic bubble around our party that all characters must remain inside if they don’t want to die. In order to progress through the level someone obviously has to carry this bucket around. While holding the bucket a player can’t really do much of anything else. They have to keep an eye on all the other players and make sure that the bubble they are casting is safely covering the entire party. Players that dash off without warning the bucket man often find themselves on the wrong side of the bubble and in a world of hurt. As you can see bucket management is a very important job. It’s easy for the bucket man to get blamed for all kinds of tragedies that might befall the group. “Well if you had just moved the bucket over here I could have killed that guy!” This is where “Dropping the bucket short” comes in. Monster X appears on the edge of the screen and the party rushes to engage him. The bucket man drops the bucket in order to join the fray but misjudges the size of his bubble and fails to envelope the monster in it. Now the monster sits just outside the bubble firing projectile attacks into it and picking off your party one by one. Meanwhile the members of your group must now brave the poisoned landscape beyond the bubble in order to battle this beast. This is often a lost cause as not only is the monster beating up on them but the very air around them causes massive amounts of damage. It’s not unheard of for an entire party to die this way, simply because of a bucket that was dropped short.

[Pug Fugly]

You're missing the point.

Communication is the game. Without it, the game is pointless.

Did you even bother to read the rest of the post?

What I'm saying, is that there are other games that share information on the screen, that still require or stimulate communication. Conflict Desert Storm being a fine example.

Come on, I'm making an effort here to say why I think the game would still work, you could at least make an effort to read my posts and address the points.

[Hawkeye]

Did you even bother to read the rest of the post?

What I'm saying, is that there are other games that share information on the screen, that still require or stimulate communication. Conflict Desert Storm being a fine example.

Come on, I'm making an effort here to say why I think the game would still work, you could at least make an effort to read my posts and address the points.

I see your piont, but I'd say implementing this in to FF:CC would totally alter the game almost to the piont of it being another game altogther.

I think the use of the GBA is used to allow the game to flow. I get the impression that having on screen commands would almost ground the game to a hault.

To play the game in the way you suggest would probably required a total redesign of the game, and then it really would be a different game. Plus it could also turn out badly that way after all so all you have is a poor game all over.

[Sprite Machine]

Did you even bother to read the rest of the post?

What I'm saying, is that there are other games that share information on the screen, that still require or stimulate communication. Conflict Desert Storm being a fine example.

Come on, I'm making an effort here to say why I think the game would still work, you could at least make an effort to read my posts and address the points.

I did. You're ignoring the fact that FF:CC is not any of those other games you mentioned.

It is a communicative game that relies on the GBAs to work. Without them it does not work. If you want a game that does work without GBAs then play a different game that isn't Crystal Chronicals.

How is this difficult?

[Pug Fugly]

rgraves - thanks for that. Although it is a poorly written article, I can see the point of it.

However, the whole thing about menus needing to stop the game etc.. Surely, this could be achieved with a little corner of the screen, so that the game could continue? Not ideal I grant you, but then again, reason enough to limit the game to such a small audience?

The one thing that does rely on the GBA is the personalised secret goals - that is a genuine use, I grant you, one I hadn't read about before. It sounds like it adds a real element of fun. But again, it seems like a relatively small element of the game.

What I don't understand is that why some of you don't think that the game shouldn't be played by people wihout enough GBAs. It doesn't need to lose much - certainly not the central requirement of communication, and certainly not enough to render the game worthless.

[rgraves]

Did you even bother to read the rest of the post?

What I'm saying, is that there are other games that share information on the screen, that still require or stimulate communication. Conflict Desert Storm being a fine example.

Come on, I'm making an effort here to say why I think the game would still work, you could at least make an effort to read my posts and address the points.

OK, let's look at this from a feature perspective:

Without the GBA screen, how would you give one player, and one player only, a map?

Without the GBA screen, how would you give each player individual, private objectives for each level?

It's things like this that make the game unique, and totally reliant on the GBA link in multi-player. Sure, they could have scrapped the individual player objectives but they didn't want to - they wanted to build a game in this way. They weren't even trying to make it function any other way.

[Pug Fugly]

It is a communicative game that relies on the GBAs to work. Without them it does not work.

It does not work. So, you've played a version based on joypads have you? No, of course you haven't.

So to just say it won't work is silly. At least I've had a good go at telling you why I think it would work, all you can come up with is "it won't work because".

They way this is going, I fully expect you to go crying to your mother next.

[Sprite Machine]

So to just say it won't work is silly.

Is it? Why's that?

I could tell you that all games don't work unless you plug a control pad in, even though I haven't tried it.

I'm talking about the actual concepts for play here.

You NEED each player to have information available to them that the other players cannot see. This a fundamental principle of the game. If you can think of a better way to do this, I suggest you e-mail Square who obviously haven't put any thought into it whatsoever.

[amanset]

It does not work. So, you've played a version based on joypads have you? No, of course you haven't.

Who knows, perhaps the programmers did and decided it was shit?