Forum Overview :: Game Development :: I recently bought that Tales of Heroes JRPG

[quote name="Lurker 15954"]and was instantly reminded of why I'm so hesitant to put battles in at all. JRPGs are (mostly usually) roller coaster rides where you enter a town, talk to all the charming NPCs and listen to charming music, read some melodramatic tripe written for high school students trying to forget about their 60-hour work weeks, and grind in a dungeon for a couple of hours. It's a potentially great system and there's nothing wrong with it. I love Breath of Fire III and the Lunar games and FF9. After playing through Divinity: Original Sin, Aarklash, and Shadowrun last month, though, it's hard to come to terms with a game that is so beloved just for being slightly above average. I'll probably go more into the mechanics of Tales of Heroes in another post, but it's so blah and uninteresting that I really can't bring myself to do it. I had pretty much the same problems with The Last Remnant, but I was just mesmerized by the overwhelming gay undertones of that game that I had to keep on playing to see if they would bring it to the forefront (they didn't). Speaking of Shadowrun, I tried out the expansion and then went back to the Genesis version. How did they mess up the hacking so badly!? They had it down almost perfect in 1994, and even the SNES minesweeper version had the idea of matrix runs being this entirely different world from magic or samurai. I also think the Genesis version might have been the first game that I know of to use a lock-on active battle system. Shadowrun Returns pretty much retains the frustration of constantly missing against superior programs, and nothing else. The workshop recreation of the Genesis game tries to fix it up a bit with a grid shaped map and skill-check nodes, but it's a piss poor substitute. It's probably the same thing as the no-quicksave debacle. The developers are mostly dudes who have been making games since the 1990's, so what gives?[/quote]