best rpgs

fyrtenheimer · Post by **fyrtenheimer** » Sun Jun 29, 2003 8:02 am

Has neone mentioned legend of legaia?

My brother got the first one off of a friend, he just beat it recently, and I've been playing whenever I'm at my mother's house.

It's actually pretty good.

/advertisement

Stoic · Post by **Stoic** » Sun Jun 29, 2003 9:26 am

I like Final Fantasy III re-released as VI I believe but I'm not sure. FF II (IV) rocked too.

Chrono Trigger was good. Kingdom Hearts, Chrono Cross, Evolution: World of the Sacred Device, Skys of Arcadia... Just to name a few. I haven't played to many new RPGs No Money :-/

BTW Final Fantasy Tatics was a Strategy Game not really an RPG. So I don't think that counts does it?

shinji13 · Post by **shinji13** » Sun Jun 29, 2003 12:33 pm

Well, if you think about it again...

Then "Final Fantasy" is an RPG but why is this, because once you beat the game you don't just save and then you beat it, it shows the credits and then it ends going back to main page and you continue to train and get weapons and materia and every thing your supposed to do.And Zelda you play it being able to go place and go back to them and then once you beat the game it goes back to main page, then you continue to complete objectives get the rest of equipment and all that stuff, or just to have fun with the game.

So isn't finalfantasy basically the same as Zelda if you don't think of CG's and the battle style, same as Kingdom Hearts if you think Zelda is just like Kingdom Hearts and only an idiot would thing Kingdom Hearts is not an RPG games can be more than one, like i rented .Hack//Mutation and it said Adventure/RPG.and i own all zeldas from gameboy to 64 not GameCube.

Alucard_FoN · Post by **Alucard_FoN** » Sun Jun 29, 2003 1:21 pm

Umm... no. FInal Fantasy is not the same as Zelda. Even IF you disregard the battle system, as we will, FInal Fantasy games actually let you develop your character in a more complex way than "collect the heart pieces." Every Final Fantasy game has some depth of character development. IN FF7, you had materia, which changed your stats. The stronger the materia, the bigger stat change. In FF8, the junction system. FF9 sucked. FFX also sucked but I will grant it that the sphere grid allowed for good levels of character customization. Earlier FF games did it to. FF2 has a great system that reminds me a lot of Saga Frontier. FF6 had... well, espers changed your stats slightly.

Anyway, the point I"m trying to make is, Final Fantasy games have far more of a right to call themselves RPG's than Zelda games do.

EarthCurrent · Post by **EarthCurrent** » Sun Jun 29, 2003 1:58 pm

Changing stats is not roleplaying...

Alucard_FoN · Post by **Alucard_FoN** » Sun Jun 29, 2003 6:53 pm

I know, but it's about as close as most console games get.

madmallard · Post by **madmallard** » Sun Jun 29, 2003 9:45 pm

i think he was trying to say that it is so much NOT role playing that it shouldn't be used in an arguement to try and support something believed to be a role playing game. Its out of place.

Besides, you get stuf that changes you ability to move, strike, defend and look in Zelda just like final fantasy has materia.

Implying that finalfantasy is somehow inherently more sophisticated because it has a more convuluted system to 'develop,' or whatever , your character, and therefore cooler/better whatever is kind of weak.

any implied 'right' to call it anything is. . .flimsy at best.

and only an 'idiot' would think the games of these days in the last 5 years could be qualified by one genre alone.

Alucard_FoN · Post by **Alucard_FoN** » Mon Jun 30, 2003 12:15 am

sixstop wrote:i think he was trying to say that it is so much NOT role playing that it shouldn't be used in an arguement to try and support something believed to be a role playing game. Its out of place.

No. I think what he was trying to say was that things such as Dungeons and Dragons are REAL role playing games. And I merely pointed out that on the console, games don't come close to reproducing that level of depth. PC games do better sometimes, but even they cannot duplicate it.

sixstop wrote:Besides, you get stuf that changes you ability to move, strike, defend and look in Zelda just like final fantasy has materia.

Wow. You get a shield that's slightly larger than the others, you always move the same, and your swords get stronger. The only reason you get stronger in Zelda at all is because if they started you out at full strength you'd be invincible and if they just made all of the enemies be as weak as the first ones you face the game would get boring fast. What tiny amounts of developing you can do to your character are there only out of necessity, not out of any attempt to let people customize their characters.

sixstop wrote:Implying that finalfantasy is somehow inherently more sophisticated because it has a more convuluted system to 'develop,' or whatever , your character, and therefore cooler/better whatever is kind of weak.

I never even used the word sophisticated. I don't know where you are pulling this stuff from (your ass, in all likelihood) but I never once said anything about Final Fantasy being more sophisticated, or in fact any way better than Zelda. All I said was Zelda was not an RPG. I'll have you know I actually like the Zelda games, I beat A Link to the Past several times. FF games are not better than Zelda games, in fact, I like Zelda games better than some of the FF games. What games are "good" or "bad" is a matter of opinion. That's not what I'm arguing. I'm just arguing that Zelda is not an RPG. Which it isn't.

sixstop wrote:any implied 'right' to call it anything is. . .flimsy at best.

Game classification is not a matter of rights. Madden games are sports games. Doom games are First Person Shooters. That's just what they are. it is not a matter of opinion, it is a matter of fact. I admit that some games fall under more than one category. Deus Ex has enough elements in it to qualify as both a First Person Shooter and a first person RPG. But Zelda games, at least every one I've ever played, which is all of them up until A Link to the Past, do not have even close to enough RPG elements in them to qualify as an RPG.

sixstop wrote:and only an 'idiot' would think the games of these days in the last 5 years could be qualified by one genre alone.

And only a 'douche bag' would think that they can't. Some games cannot, and some can, just like always. Rise of Nations is a Real Time Strategy game. It is nothing BUT a Real Time Strategy game. It falls under one (1) category only. As will Half Life 2 when it comes out. It will be a First Person Shooter. That's all it will be. Some games, as I mentioned before, fall under more than one category. Zelda games do not. They are Action/Adventure games. That is all they are.

Eek-1 · Post by **Eek-1** » Mon Jun 30, 2003 11:16 am

For me, the best crpg right now is... Phantasy Star for Sega Megadrive! It's the evergreen of 16bit videogames.

DaggerDust26 · Post by **DaggerDust26** » Mon Jun 30, 2003 11:20 am

wow ok first ff9 didnt suck(had to add that). next comparing final fantasy and zelda like that makes them kinda the same. i mean in the end they kinda do the same thing. next isnt an rpg a role playing game in general? most have a fighting system in which its all in order but zelda doesnt but yet in zelda u do learn alot about the characters and u experience everything through link. yea fine no real leveling up in zelda but isnt the hearts kinda a way of leveling? if im wrong explain.

next to add on this list star ocean, its a really cute game but its really good only problem with it and also the same problem in chrono trigger(not that i dotn love that game with my very being) is that theres WAYYYYY to many endings. yea sure i love an rpg where its not just one way but god damm 67 different endings!?!?!? who the hecks gonna play the game for that long!?!?!?!? over all its good just a little weird.

and while im here im going to add two more games to this list. first is 'tales of destiny 2', i've never played the first one but its a really good game(though havent played cuz im stuck)it has interestign graphics a kool story line 'different' characters and even a different language all together(plus some really kool card games sooo adictive). and yes this is one of the many adorable rpgs. now i gotta ask, why are there soo many adorable rpgs??? i find it that most ppl tend not to wanna play rpg's because of there adorable and sweet nature. it tends to pull ppl away but i gotta ask why are most of them soo cute?are rpgs sterotyped for girls? or is it because its all about role playign and ppl always want a happy ending?

ok now on to my next game, 'karta:the world of fate'. OMG sooo good lovely graphics when going to next chapter(even though u cant move at all its all stationed to u). i think its like an rpg because its all about seeing it through someone elses life(a male and female character, ya just pick one). the story will pull u into the world itself, u even get to suck to it that ur waiting til the next character to fidn out what happens.though sadly i never beat it and someone*points to older sister* deleted my file

she wanted to play so i let her(that was smart). but over all if ya got cash spend it on this game u WOTN be sry(besides its old it was only 9 bucks

)