Post by Bytor on Apr 25, 2011 20:00:51 GMT -5
While playing a mission on Jeanne D'Arc today I was reminded of something I'm not so fond of being reminded of while playing video games. How in the world does some of the game play issues ever leave the testers hands and go into development!?! The game in question is actually a very, very enjoyable game and overall I am highly satisfied with the game. However, the mission in question is at best simply silly. Basically you have to escort a NPC (who to make matters even more fun has basically no hit points and at best may, and I repeat MAY, survive one attack) from point A to point B in 20 turns or less (for those unfamiliar with the game it's a SRPG based on a loose fantasy-based interpretation of Joan of Arc's life and The Hundred Years War). Now, in and of itself this is an OK mission and certainly requires some planning and thought. But, here's what makes it, IMO, simply silly. Not only is the NPC incredibly weak but the AI is also incredibly stupid. He will walk right into the enemies attack range and to make matters more fun there is a decently high percentage that your attacks on certain enemies will sporadically miss. Now, don't get me wrong, this is not a hard mission, but I have to wonder how the mission stayed in the game as it is. Did not one single tester notice that the AI made this mission a tad silly? I actually failed once two steps away from the goal when I missed four straight attacks, thus giving the enemies a turn which they of course capitalized on immediately. Now, before you start thinking I'm simply complaining because I lost let me elaborate...I died the next attempt because the NPC was shot by an archer many spaces away, I didn't miss that attack, heck all my people were too far away to even attempt to attack the archer and I, as stated earlier cannot control the NPC's movements. I failed the next attempt by missing three attacks in a row by three different allies once again allowing the enemy to capitalize (testers/developers take note, this IS a SRPG with emphasis, at least in the game play on the "S", it's NOT bad strategy on my part if my attacks miss!!!! No exaggeration, one of my strongest guys missed his attacks four turns in a row!!!! and now for the best, had to save it for last...once the NPC, whom I had surrounded on three sides to protect actually turned to the left, went down a passageway that led back to where the mission started, opposite direction from the goal I might add, and walked straight into an enemy archers range...an enemy that because I didn't take the left side had NOT moved the whole game...seriously? Gimme a break! That is worse than sloppy Ai). Now maybe it's me, but I feel this mission should have been "noticed" and tweaked a tad, I mean really it should be easy, when I do land blows I'm destroying the enemy easily, problem is the NPC simply walks straight ahead each turn and the AI is determined I'm going to randomly (seemingly too much I believe) miss. Now I'm NOT picking on Jeanned D'Arc and that is not what this rant is about. My point is how come in this day and age of a multi-million dollar gaming industry we still have crappy and more importantly IMO senseless game play mechanics.
Mechanics should be the easy part. After all, one person's rose is another persons garbage so I understand not everyone is going to like the story in Tales of the Abyss and some people will think Xenosaga is the ultimate in pretentiousness. I get that. And certainly you may love the battle system in .hack while it drove me somewhat crazy (having said that there was nothing necessarily wrong with it, I just didn't like it) and you may hate the battles in Digital Devil Saga while I loved it. Seriously, I get that. What I really don't get is a battle that is simply ridiculous (final boss in Shadow Hearts: From the New World is a perfect example) or a battle system that is clunky and/or has a ridiculous interface, or for that matter ANY side quest that only gives you money (or local equivalent) or experience, heck, I thought that was what grinding was for (and I'll save that rant for later, lol). What exactly were the testers smoking when they told the developer,, "oh yeah, that's great"! Are the testers too afraid to piss off the developers? Is it all a deadline issue? Do they think with slick advertising and marketing we'll buy anything? I'm not sure of the answer obviously. What I am sure of is there needs to be more accountability. I understand no one is perfect and certainly no game is (and once again for the record I am NOT talking about hard battles or tough missions, I'm talking about battles and/or missions that when you finish you ask yourself (and the game, lol) what in the world was that and why in the world was I forced to do it! C'mon guys, stop giving us garbage games, gimme a garbage story anytime you want, who knows, I may actually love it (I loved Rogue Galaxy and it's hard to get more cliche than it was!, hahaha), but I seriously don't want to have to muddle through anymore ridiculous battle systems and more importantly stupid, silly, nonsensical missions that force me to question if I am having fun or not. I paid good money for this experience, make it worth my expenditure in both time and money or put it in the garbage and take it to the curb.
Mechanics should be the easy part. After all, one person's rose is another persons garbage so I understand not everyone is going to like the story in Tales of the Abyss and some people will think Xenosaga is the ultimate in pretentiousness. I get that. And certainly you may love the battle system in .hack while it drove me somewhat crazy (having said that there was nothing necessarily wrong with it, I just didn't like it) and you may hate the battles in Digital Devil Saga while I loved it. Seriously, I get that. What I really don't get is a battle that is simply ridiculous (final boss in Shadow Hearts: From the New World is a perfect example) or a battle system that is clunky and/or has a ridiculous interface, or for that matter ANY side quest that only gives you money (or local equivalent) or experience, heck, I thought that was what grinding was for (and I'll save that rant for later, lol). What exactly were the testers smoking when they told the developer,, "oh yeah, that's great"! Are the testers too afraid to piss off the developers? Is it all a deadline issue? Do they think with slick advertising and marketing we'll buy anything? I'm not sure of the answer obviously. What I am sure of is there needs to be more accountability. I understand no one is perfect and certainly no game is (and once again for the record I am NOT talking about hard battles or tough missions, I'm talking about battles and/or missions that when you finish you ask yourself (and the game, lol) what in the world was that and why in the world was I forced to do it! C'mon guys, stop giving us garbage games, gimme a garbage story anytime you want, who knows, I may actually love it (I loved Rogue Galaxy and it's hard to get more cliche than it was!, hahaha), but I seriously don't want to have to muddle through anymore ridiculous battle systems and more importantly stupid, silly, nonsensical missions that force me to question if I am having fun or not. I paid good money for this experience, make it worth my expenditure in both time and money or put it in the garbage and take it to the curb.
