Good call on Lightning Returns, Gamespot!

  • 55 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by Metamania (12018 posts) -

For those wondering what exactly the title is about, Kevin VanOrd reviewed the game and scored it 5 out of 10.

Granted, I've only played the demo, but I'm glad it was the right call to make. Developers should not be punishing videogamers for exploring or taking the time to fight and try out new ideas with the outfits that Lightning is able to equip. Only a few videogames, in fact, were successful enough to use the whole "time against you" mechanic well enough to keep you going without punishing you (Majora's Mask being the one that comes to my mind off the top of my head). Now, that being said, the battle system did show a lot of promise to me and I liked the idea of having to switch my outfits so that I can attempt new strategies against whoever I was fighting.

For me, I'd rather take my time with RPGs and explore everything it has to offer without time being a factor used against me and in that sense, Lightning Returns has failed. Then again, Final Fantasy XIII and XIII-2 are major failures in my eyes, so it's no surprise that the conclusion of that disappointing trilogy was exactly that - disappointing in itself. Once again, I know that I'm judging this early based on a demo and without playing the full game, but I can't help but hate Square Enix for dumping this trash on us and making us play it while we have to wait for something better to come along.

For those who have played the demo, do you think Gamespot made the right call? If so, why or if not, why not? Discuss please!

#2 Edited by pupp3t_mast3r (141 posts) -

Gamespot could've given every FF game since X a 5 out of 10 and I would've agreed! Yes yes I'm one of "those" people when it comes to the FF series.

I'll probably be skipping this FF (first one to skip to date) and go back to Bravely Default.

#3 Posted by huerito323 (1377 posts) -

@Metamania said:

For those wondering what exactly the title is about, Kevin VanOrd reviewed the game and scored it 5 out of 10.

Granted, I've only played the demo, but I'm glad it was the right call to make. Developers should not be punishing videogamers for exploring or taking the time to fight and try out new ideas with the outfits that Lightning is able to equip. Only a few videogames, in fact, were successful enough to use the whole "time against you" mechanic well enough to keep you going without punishing you (Majora's Mask being the one that comes to my mind off the top of my head). Now, that being said, the battle system did show a lot of promise to me and I liked the idea of having to switch my outfits so that I can attempt new strategies against whoever I was fighting.

For me, I'd rather take my time with RPGs and explore everything it has to offer without time being a factor used against me and in that sense, Lightning Returns has failed. Then again, Final Fantasy XIII and XIII-2 are major failures in my eyes, so it's no surprise that the conclusion of that disappointing trilogy was exactly that - disappointing in itself. Once again, I know that I'm judging this early based on a demo and without playing the full game, but I can't help but hate Square Enix for dumping this trash on us and making us play it while we have to wait for something better to come along.

For those who have played the demo, do you think Gamespot made the right call? If so, why or if not, why not? Discuss please!

Nothing to see here folks. Just a rant on a game he hasn't even played yet.

#4 Posted by RadioGooGoo (210 posts) -

@Metamania said:

Developers should not be punishing videogamers for exploring or taking the time to fight and try out new ideas with the outfits that Lightning is able to equip

I could swear I've heard that the timer thing stops when you're in battle, meaning that you can go for your life trying out new ideas with outfits.

#5 Edited by Lhomity (771 posts) -

Kevin's review was very good, but I like to play games before passing judgment on them. Whatever floats your boat, I guess.

I played the demo. It was kinda shallow. I played a couple of hours of the full Japanese version. Couldn't follow it very well, but it seemed okay. Not amazing. I'm expecting the full english version to arrive in the mail before the weekend. I'll play it then, and find out for myself.

#6 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18541 posts) -

Wait, so the time limit is in the final game as well? Wow, this game manages to slaughter my interest in it with every passing day. A pity, cause I was going to buy it to complete the FFXIII collection, but as it is I have zero interest in it. Time limits ruined great games like Majora's Mask and Fallout for me, I'm not subjecting myself to more of that.

#7 Posted by firefox59 (4409 posts) -

Haven't played the game but I will. I highly doubt it'll deserve a 5 out of 10. Gamespot continues to give odd review scores.

#8 Posted by Netret0120 (2212 posts) -

@huerito323:

Agreed. What a rant.

I doubt anyone uses GS scores when deciding to get a game. Metacritic is better. Gives an average and if possible play the game yourself before deciding.

#9 Posted by GamerForca (7095 posts) -

I'm 6 hours in. It's boring as hell so far. Almost unbelievably bad. I didn't think XIII or XIII-2 were all that great, but at least they weren't aggressively bad, and they each had some good moments. Half the time in this game, it seems like I'm running around trying to find side quests (essentially doing nothing) while waiting to be able to continue with the main quest, which I COULD just go ahead and do by going to an inn and moving the time forward, but I've already found out that some quests are timed, so if you miss them, they're gone. Which means I can't really move the time ahead, especially since the side quests give good rewards. And then there's other quests which send you on fetch quests (lots of fetch quests) and give you a small window in which you must do everything, and if you miss that window, then you have to wait until the window appears again on the next day to complete the quest. Which is freaking messed up.

#10 Posted by Evil_Saluki (4878 posts) -

I'm going to have an online walkthrough by my side as I play this. Annoyingly.

I want to play it, the time thing is the only thing I don't like the sound of, which Kevin makes out to be a big problem for reasons which sound very plausible. I not played it yet but I will be when it's released this Friday. I'm a bit confused at peoples hatred to Lightnings character, sure I prefer Serah but I'm interested in game mechanics and progression, not so much an Oscer nominee performance for it's protagonist, which seems to be a demand for some of you. From what I seen of Lightning she's not changed much. She's a fairly quiet character which is something I can get behind. I suppose I've made her more interesting by my decision that she's in lesbians with her sister.

I beat Dead Rising I will beat this.

#11 Edited by Metamania (12018 posts) -

@Lhomity said:

Kevin's review was very good, but I like to play games before passing judgment on them. Whatever floats your boat, I guess.

I played the demo. It was kinda shallow. I played a couple of hours of the full Japanese version. Couldn't follow it very well, but it seemed okay. Not amazing. I'm expecting the full english version to arrive in the mail before the weekend. I'll play it then, and find out for myself.

You do that, but the demo that I played, from start to finish, gave me enough of an impression to say that the final game really isn't worth it, especially with time being a factor against you. By the way, I NEVER judged the game. I never scored it or anything of that nature, so please don't assume. Thank you!

#12 Edited by Metamania (12018 posts) -

@huerito323 said:

@Metamania said:

For those wondering what exactly the title is about, Kevin VanOrd reviewed the game and scored it 5 out of 10.

Granted, I've only played the demo, but I'm glad it was the right call to make. Developers should not be punishing videogamers for exploring or taking the time to fight and try out new ideas with the outfits that Lightning is able to equip. Only a few videogames, in fact, were successful enough to use the whole "time against you" mechanic well enough to keep you going without punishing you (Majora's Mask being the one that comes to my mind off the top of my head). Now, that being said, the battle system did show a lot of promise to me and I liked the idea of having to switch my outfits so that I can attempt new strategies against whoever I was fighting.

For me, I'd rather take my time with RPGs and explore everything it has to offer without time being a factor used against me and in that sense, Lightning Returns has failed. Then again, Final Fantasy XIII and XIII-2 are major failures in my eyes, so it's no surprise that the conclusion of that disappointing trilogy was exactly that - disappointing in itself. Once again, I know that I'm judging this early based on a demo and without playing the full game, but I can't help but hate Square Enix for dumping this trash on us and making us play it while we have to wait for something better to come along.

For those who have played the demo, do you think Gamespot made the right call? If so, why or if not, why not? Discuss please!

Nothing to see here folks. Just a rant on a game he hasn't even played yet.

It's funny how you took the time to care for my post then. Ironic, isn't it? Yeah, please leave.

#13 Posted by Planeforger (15802 posts) -

"To be fair, Lightning's stoicism is a story point in Lightning Returns, yet it's this same stoicism that makes it nigh impossible to connect with her; she has but one personal motivation, and is defined solely by that motivation. In fact, every character in Lightning Returns is defined by the most basic of traits, all of which serve the needs of the plot, rather than the plot flowing from the needs of the characters. How amazing, then, that these characters never stop talking, finding new ways to explain the simple events occurring around them with as many words as possible. For having so little to say, the characters of Lightning Returns sure do talk a lot. You could say the same things about many other Japanese role-playing games, as well as plenty of anime and manga, but I can't remember the last time I played a game with so much dialogue that went absolutely nowhere."

Two paragraphs into the review, and I'm already fairly certain that I never want to play this one.

I struggled through FFXIII's meandering, pointless plot because...well, I'm not sure why, but I'm not about to sit through another 50 hours of the same terrible characters talking more crap than ever before.

#14 Posted by Metamania (12018 posts) -

@Black_Knight_00 said:

Wait, so the time limit is in the final game as well? Wow, this game manages to slaughter my interest in it with every passing day. A pity, cause I was going to buy it to complete the FFXIII collection, but as it is I have zero interest in it. Time limits ruined great games like Majora's Mask and Fallout for me, I'm not subjecting myself to more of that.

Yeah, according to the reviews that I've been reading, the time limit is also in the game as well. That's not a good thing to me at all. Like I said though, Majora's Mask, IMO, was successful in using time, but not to the point of where it majorly punishes you. From my experience with the demo, it does. And I hate that feeling. I didn't know that Fallout also used the same mechanic though...or was that in one of the games or in all of them?

#15 Posted by Mesomorphin (826 posts) -

its shit.....waiting for 15 now.

#16 Posted by Planeforger (15802 posts) -

@Metamania said:

@Black_Knight_00 said:

Wait, so the time limit is in the final game as well? Wow, this game manages to slaughter my interest in it with every passing day. A pity, cause I was going to buy it to complete the FFXIII collection, but as it is I have zero interest in it. Time limits ruined great games like Majora's Mask and Fallout for me, I'm not subjecting myself to more of that.

Yeah, according to the reviews that I've been reading, the time limit is also in the game as well. That's not a good thing to me at all. Like I said though, Majora's Mask, IMO, was successful in using time, but not to the point of where it majorly punishes you. From my experience with the demo, it does. And I hate that feeling. I didn't know that Fallout also used the same mechanic though...or was that in one of the games or in all of them?

In the original Fallout, you had 150 days to find a replacement water chip for your Vault. If you failed, their purification systems fail and they died.There was also a later time limit for the overall plot, but the first patch removed that.

Finding the water chip wasn't too difficult though, and you had plenty of time afterwards to explore the rest of the wasteland, so it wasn't such a big deal.

#17 Posted by Metamania (12018 posts) -

@Planeforger said:

@Metamania said:

@Black_Knight_00 said:

Wait, so the time limit is in the final game as well? Wow, this game manages to slaughter my interest in it with every passing day. A pity, cause I was going to buy it to complete the FFXIII collection, but as it is I have zero interest in it. Time limits ruined great games like Majora's Mask and Fallout for me, I'm not subjecting myself to more of that.

Yeah, according to the reviews that I've been reading, the time limit is also in the game as well. That's not a good thing to me at all. Like I said though, Majora's Mask, IMO, was successful in using time, but not to the point of where it majorly punishes you. From my experience with the demo, it does. And I hate that feeling. I didn't know that Fallout also used the same mechanic though...or was that in one of the games or in all of them?

In the original Fallout, you had 150 days to find a replacement water chip for your Vault. If you failed, their purification systems fail and they died.There was also a later time limit for the overall plot, but the first patch removed that.

Finding the water chip wasn't too difficult though, and you had plenty of time afterwards to explore the rest of the wasteland, so it wasn't such a big deal.

See, that's fine by me. As long as you are given enough time to explore everything that the game has to offer before time runs out, that's cool. At least they had the sense to give you 150 days before the purification is destroyed.

#18 Edited by yngsten (224 posts) -

@huerito323 said:

@Metamania said:

For those wondering what exactly the title is about, Kevin VanOrd reviewed the game and scored it 5 out of 10.

Granted, I've only played the demo, but I'm glad it was the right call to make. Developers should not be punishing videogamers for exploring or taking the time to fight and try out new ideas with the outfits that Lightning is able to equip. Only a few videogames, in fact, were successful enough to use the whole "time against you" mechanic well enough to keep you going without punishing you (Majora's Mask being the one that comes to my mind off the top of my head). Now, that being said, the battle system did show a lot of promise to me and I liked the idea of having to switch my outfits so that I can attempt new strategies against whoever I was fighting.

For me, I'd rather take my time with RPGs and explore everything it has to offer without time being a factor used against me and in that sense, Lightning Returns has failed. Then again, Final Fantasy XIII and XIII-2 are major failures in my eyes, so it's no surprise that the conclusion of that disappointing trilogy was exactly that - disappointing in itself. Once again, I know that I'm judging this early based on a demo and without playing the full game, but I can't help but hate Square Enix for dumping this trash on us and making us play it while we have to wait for something better to come along.

For those who have played the demo, do you think Gamespot made the right call? If so, why or if not, why not? Discuss please!

Nothing to see here folks. Just a rant on a game he hasn't even played yet.

hahaha, nice one.

#19 Posted by Metamania (12018 posts) -

@yngsten said:

@huerito323 said:

@Metamania said:

For those wondering what exactly the title is about, Kevin VanOrd reviewed the game and scored it 5 out of 10.

Granted, I've only played the demo, but I'm glad it was the right call to make. Developers should not be punishing videogamers for exploring or taking the time to fight and try out new ideas with the outfits that Lightning is able to equip. Only a few videogames, in fact, were successful enough to use the whole "time against you" mechanic well enough to keep you going without punishing you (Majora's Mask being the one that comes to my mind off the top of my head). Now, that being said, the battle system did show a lot of promise to me and I liked the idea of having to switch my outfits so that I can attempt new strategies against whoever I was fighting.

For me, I'd rather take my time with RPGs and explore everything it has to offer without time being a factor used against me and in that sense, Lightning Returns has failed. Then again, Final Fantasy XIII and XIII-2 are major failures in my eyes, so it's no surprise that the conclusion of that disappointing trilogy was exactly that - disappointing in itself. Once again, I know that I'm judging this early based on a demo and without playing the full game, but I can't help but hate Square Enix for dumping this trash on us and making us play it while we have to wait for something better to come along.

For those who have played the demo, do you think Gamespot made the right call? If so, why or if not, why not? Discuss please!

Nothing to see here folks. Just a rant on a game he hasn't even played yet.

hahaha, nice one.

It's not. Please leave.

#20 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18541 posts) -

@Planeforger said:

@Metamania said:

Yeah, according to the reviews that I've been reading, the time limit is also in the game as well. That's not a good thing to me at all. Like I said though, Majora's Mask, IMO, was successful in using time, but not to the point of where it majorly punishes you. From my experience with the demo, it does. And I hate that feeling. I didn't know that Fallout also used the same mechanic though...or was that in one of the games or in all of them?

In the original Fallout, you had 150 days to find a replacement water chip for your Vault. If you failed, their purification systems fail and they died.There was also a later time limit for the overall plot, but the first patch removed that.

Finding the water chip wasn't too difficult though, and you had plenty of time afterwards to explore the rest of the wasteland, so it wasn't such a big deal.

My problem being: I don't want any sort of time restraint, especially in an open world game. Sure, it's realistic to have a deadline but it completely spoils my enjoyment of the game. The first time playing Fallout there is no way to tell how strict the time limit is: oh sure after reading online I found out you can beat the game in a fraction of those 150 days, but just by playing the game you have no way of knowing that. I found myself wondering if accepting every sidequest would waste too much of my time and fail the main quest and that dragged me out of the game entirely.

Same with Majora's Mask: it's a beautiful game made for exploration and secret-hunting, having to constantly keep an eye on the clock and being arbitrarily sent back every hour and a half (2 hours and a half from halfway through the game) just frustrated me to no end.

#21 Posted by nicecall (428 posts) -

i disliked all the FFXIII games, and not surprised this one is the worst. Bad main character, even worse gameplay mechanics. Trying three sequels with a turd main character i don't know what square was thinking.

#22 Posted by Evil_Saluki (4878 posts) -

I just hope I can pause the game and go toilet, have dinner or have sex without worrying that the apocalypse is coming and I don't have time to wash for all 3.

#23 Posted by platinumking320 (667 posts) -

@Black_Knight_00 said:

@Planeforger said:

@Metamania said:

Yeah, according to the reviews that I've been reading, the time limit is also in the game as well. That's not a good thing to me at all. Like I said though, Majora's Mask, IMO, was successful in using time, but not to the point of where it majorly punishes you. From my experience with the demo, it does. And I hate that feeling. I didn't know that Fallout also used the same mechanic though...or was that in one of the games or in all of them?

In the original Fallout, you had 150 days to find a replacement water chip for your Vault. If you failed, their purification systems fail and they died.There was also a later time limit for the overall plot, but the first patch removed that.

Finding the water chip wasn't too difficult though, and you had plenty of time afterwards to explore the rest of the wasteland, so it wasn't such a big deal.

My problem being: I don't want any sort of time restraint, especially in an open world game. Sure, it's realistic to have a deadline but it completely spoils my enjoyment of the game. The first time playing Fallout there is no way to tell how strict the time limit is: oh sure after reading online I found out you can beat the game in a fraction of those 150 days, but just by playing the game you have no way of knowing that. I found myself wondering if accepting every sidequest would waste too much of my time and fail the main quest and that dragged me out of the game entirely.

Same with Majora's Mask: it's a beautiful game made for exploration and secret-hunting, having to constantly keep an eye on the clock and being arbitrarily sent back every hour and a half (2 hours and a half from halfway through the game) just frustrated me to no end.

I think some folks are misusing the sandbox concept. First in FC2 and B:AO by not populating it enough now in this FFXIII:LR by how the time limit is applied. We've assumed the sandbox should be a standard since GTAIII to give the player a sense of independence, but putting in game mechanics that don't jibe with it. Time limits freedom.

Time limits as far as I know work best in contained speed run or survival mode maps like the mercenaries modes in Resident Evil, or on a larger scale, games that are a little bit more checkpoint or linear.

#24 Edited by Black_Knight_00 (18541 posts) -

@platinumking320 said:

I think some folks are misusing the sandbox concept. First in FC2 and B:AO by not populating it enough now in this FFXIII:LR by how the time limit is applied. We've assumed the sandbox should be a standard since GTAIII to give the player a sense of independence, but putting in game mechanics that don't jibe with it. Time limits freedom.

Time limits as far as I know work best in contained speed run or survival mode maps like the mercenaries modes in Resident Evil, or on a larger scale, games that are a little bit more checkpoint or linear.

I agree. The whole point of an open world sandbox is to give the player complete freedom to go and do as he pleases and scatter interesting activities to engage in around the map to do if and when he wants. Anything that twists your arm into doing something you would rather do later is a violation of the whole ethos of the genre.

#25 Posted by Archangel3371 (15753 posts) -

Well other places have given it better reviews so really there's more opinions to take into account. Personally I'll have to play the game myself to see how I'll like the game. The time restriction doesn't automatically ruin a game for me. If this has a new game + feature that supports multiple playthroughs then I'll be fine with that. I really enjoyed the first two FFXIII games, didn't really have any issues with the characters and I'm invested in the story so I will be buying this game.

#26 Posted by platinumking320 (667 posts) -

@Black_Knight_00 said:

@platinumking320 said:

I think some folks are misusing the sandbox concept. First in FC2 and B:AO by not populating it enough now in this FFXIII:LR by how the time limit is applied. We've assumed the sandbox should be a standard since GTAIII to give the player a sense of independence, but putting in game mechanics that don't jibe with it. Time limits freedom.

Time limits as far as I know work best in contained speed run or survival mode maps like the mercenaries modes in Resident Evil, or on a larger scale, games that are a little bit more checkpoint or linear.

I agree. The whole point of an open world sandbox is to give the player complete freedom to go and do as he pleases and scatter interesting activities to engage in around the map to do if and when he wants. Anything that twists your arm into doing something you would rather do later is a violation of the whole ethos of the genre.

Yeah, the priority should be on clever execution instead of just superficial game elements. Its like we're forgetting about how crucial, creative level design is. Makes me think of the monster maze or puzzle style levels of older rpgs and fps.

Those game worlds were not only smart but also pretty large, and based on unlocking more of the world, going forwards and backwards, and sideways getting keys just to progress, yet still being linear.

It's another sign of decay in the game industry when folks don't facilitate challenge creatively anymore.

#27 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18541 posts) -

@platinumking320 said:

Yeah, the priority should be on clever execution instead of just superficial game elements. Its like we're forgetting about how crucial, creative level design is. Makes me think of the monster maze or puzzle style levels of older rpgs and fps.

Those game worlds were not only smart but also pretty large, and based on unlocking more of the world, going forwards and backwards, and sideways getting keys just to progress, yet still being linear.

It's another sign of decay in the game industry when folks don't facilitate challenge creatively anymore.

Pretty much. That's what happens when a business booms and the suits take over. Less creativity, more playing it safe.

#28 Posted by Zen_Light (1236 posts) -

I read that playing on easy offers some time bonuses and removes time-costing penalties.

#29 Posted by ristactionjakso (5742 posts) -

I tend to agree with Kevin on most of his reviews. Good review, ff13 is just a bad series.

#30 Posted by Randolph (10542 posts) -

@ristactionjakso said:

I tend to agree with Kevin on most of his reviews. Good review, ff13 is just a bad series.

On the whole I'd have to agree. I actually liked FFXIII a good bit, even though the twenty hour tutorial ruins replay value by making replaying a boring chore. XIII-2 made me want to drown a sack full of dumb puppies. It was terrible. The new one, to me, has looked like an extreme case of milking designed to make money through DLC to help them finish recouping their losses from XIII's horrible development cycle. I decided well in advance it was a do not want, could have gotten a 9.0 and I still wouldn't be interested.

#31 Posted by Bigboi500 (30113 posts) -

Starting the 15 min install process now...

#32 Posted by huerito323 (1377 posts) -

Agreeing with a review on a game you haven't even played is idiotic. If the time limit bothers you, then the game is not meant for you. It doesn't make it a bad game because you can't deal with that. If I don't like violent games, I'm not going to shit all over GTA and call it a bad game. Many people that have already finished the game have had no problem with the time limit, and you can increase it by doing quests. The time limit is part of the game design, and you don't have to do every side quest on your first playthrough. There's new game+.

It's ridiculous how much hate this series is getting, all for changing things up and actually doing something different. Yet people complain when games stay the same. I feel bad for developers.

#33 Posted by The_Last_Ride (72503 posts) -

The timer stops when you battle and you can't "lose" the game or be game over. The game just starts over again with the same items you had

#35 Posted by Randolph (10542 posts) -

@huerito323 said:

It's ridiculous how much hate this series is getting, all for changing things up and actually doing something different. Yet people complain when games stay the same. I feel bad for developers.

I don't think any developer deserves praise for just trying. "A for effort" doesn't fly here. FFXII changed things up and received far less vitriol than FFXIII did, in fact it has a strong following calling for a HD re-release of the International version. FFXIII changed things up as well, and despite some folks liking it, myself included for the first game, Square-Enix completely ignored the overwhelmingly negative feedback and made two direct sequels.

That is a business strategy that simply makes no sense. It's mid/late nineties Sega style stupidity.

#36 Posted by Metamania (12018 posts) -

@huerito323 said:

Agreeing with a review on a game you haven't even played is idiotic. If the time limit bothers you, then the game is not meant for you. It doesn't make it a bad game because you can't deal with that. If I don't like violent games, I'm not going to shit all over GTA and call it a bad game. Many people that have already finished the game have had no problem with the time limit, and you can increase it by doing quests. The time limit is part of the game design, and you don't have to do every side quest on your first playthrough. There's new game+.

It's ridiculous how much hate this series is getting, all for changing things up and actually doing something different. Yet people complain when games stay the same. I feel bad for developers.

I'm not going to listen to this crap and your theory about violent games and GTA has no purpose being here. If you enjoy the game, that's fine, but if not, that's fine too. I've only played the demo from start to finish and can pretty much imagine what the rest of the game will be like for me. But to tell me that I agree with a review of a game that I haven't played is idiotic is a waste of time. I do what I want, when I please.

I played enough Final Fantasy XIII to know that it's one of the worst trilogies I've seen and even if Final Fantasy XIII-2 made some improvements, that doesn't mean it's a great series. Basically, what I'm telling you is that Square Enix screwed the pooch on FFXIII and in order to justify its existence, they had to shove it down our throats to make money when it's not even that good to BEGIN WITH. Why aren't people realizing that?

#37 Edited by huerito323 (1377 posts) -

@Metamania said:

@huerito323 said:

Agreeing with a review on a game you haven't even played is idiotic. If the time limit bothers you, then the game is not meant for you. It doesn't make it a bad game because you can't deal with that. If I don't like violent games, I'm not going to shit all over GTA and call it a bad game. Many people that have already finished the game have had no problem with the time limit, and you can increase it by doing quests. The time limit is part of the game design, and you don't have to do every side quest on your first playthrough. There's new game+.

It's ridiculous how much hate this series is getting, all for changing things up and actually doing something different. Yet people complain when games stay the same. I feel bad for developers.

I'm not going to listen to this crap and your theory about violent games and GTA has no purpose being here. If you enjoy the game, that's fine, but if not, that's fine too. I've only played the demo from start to finish and can pretty much imagine what the rest of the game will be like for me. But to tell me that I agree with a review of a game that I haven't played is idiotic is a waste of time. I do what I want, when I please.

I played enough Final Fantasy XIII to know that it's one of the worst trilogies I've seen and even if Final Fantasy XIII-2 made some improvements, that doesn't mean it's a great series. Basically, what I'm telling you is that Square Enix screwed the pooch on FFXIII and in order to justify its existence, they had to shove it down our throats to make money when it's not even that good to BEGIN WITH. Why aren't people realizing that?

You sure do, and I'm not going to do anything about it except be the guy that tells you it's idiotic. If someone asks for an opinion on a video game they're thinking about getting, are they going to listen to the guy who just played the demo, or the guy who played the full game? The answer is simple and I don't even need to explain it.

They didn't shove anything down your throat, nor did they take your money. You've only played the demo remember? The people who buy it are the people that are fans of the XIII series. Move on already and stop being such a baby for no reason.

#38 Edited by Bigboi500 (30113 posts) -

The game is very disappointing early on. After about two hours it went back on the shelf and will probably stay there. Very meh.

#39 Posted by jdc6305 (3896 posts) -

I've played just about every major console installment in the franchises history. I haven't played a FF game I liked since IX and that was a very long time ago. I'm giving up on the series unless they do something drastic to make it better.

#40 Edited by ShepardCommandr (2755 posts) -

After playing for about 5-6 hours i agree with this review.In fact i think it's worse,way worse and this is coming from a big ff fan who actually liked x-2.

#41 Posted by Ballroompirate (23052 posts) -

Doesn't surprise me FF13 LR bombed, the story, characters and game play are the worst in the series, hell I'd rather play Mystics than any of the FF13 games.

#42 Posted by Shmiity (5154 posts) -

How is anyone surprised? This 13 series was doomed from the start.

#43 Edited by i-rock-socks (3072 posts) -

anything related to final fantasy 13 is garbage, and im not saying that as a manner of a fanboy blindly spewing hate but the objective analysis of all three games based solely on there own merits and finding each and every one of them lacking of even the slightest amount of redeeming qualities. i honestly have no idea why they made 3 games in the 13 arc.

#44 Posted by t1striker (1549 posts) -

Hmm... I'm enjoying the game quite a bit. I'd give it a solid 8/10 so far. About 10-12 hours in.

#45 Edited by LJS9502_basic (151511 posts) -

@Metamania said:

For those wondering what exactly the title is about, Kevin VanOrd reviewed the game and scored it 5 out of 10.

Granted, I've only played the demo,

If you only played the demo then you can't say 5 out of 10 was a good call.

As for the time issue.....from what I've read elsewhere it isn't a big deal. However....play what you want.

#46 Posted by gamingqueen (31076 posts) -

@huerito323 said:

@Metamania said:

@huerito323 said:

Agreeing with a review on a game you haven't even played is idiotic. If the time limit bothers you, then the game is not meant for you. It doesn't make it a bad game because you can't deal with that. If I don't like violent games, I'm not going to shit all over GTA and call it a bad game. Many people that have already finished the game have had no problem with the time limit, and you can increase it by doing quests. The time limit is part of the game design, and you don't have to do every side quest on your first playthrough. There's new game+.

It's ridiculous how much hate this series is getting, all for changing things up and actually doing something different. Yet people complain when games stay the same. I feel bad for developers.

I'm not going to listen to this crap and your theory about violent games and GTA has no purpose being here. If you enjoy the game, that's fine, but if not, that's fine too. I've only played the demo from start to finish and can pretty much imagine what the rest of the game will be like for me. But to tell me that I agree with a review of a game that I haven't played is idiotic is a waste of time. I do what I want, when I please.

I played enough Final Fantasy XIII to know that it's one of the worst trilogies I've seen and even if Final Fantasy XIII-2 made some improvements, that doesn't mean it's a great series. Basically, what I'm telling you is that Square Enix screwed the pooch on FFXIII and in order to justify its existence, they had to shove it down our throats to make money when it's not even that good to BEGIN WITH. Why aren't people realizing that?

You sure do, and I'm not going to do anything about it except be the guy that tells you it's idiotic. If someone asks for an opinion on a video game they're thinking about getting, are they going to listen to the guy who just played the demo, or the guy who played the full game? The answer is simple and I don't even need to explain it.

They didn't shove anything down your throat, nor did they take your money. You've only played the demo remember? The people who buy it are the people that are fans of the XIII series. Move on already and stop being such a baby for no reason.

This is a message board and anyone can come and post their impression about a game and they don't have to agree with you. Get it.

I agree with the OP. Ever since they said it was going to be "on thirteen days" I remembered the day and night system in Shenmue. When the game was first released Sega was boasting about the time concept. For me it made it repetitive and boring. It put you off playing rather than making you keep going. Sometimes one doesn't have to play the game to tell when a concept is going to fail especially when a game tried to do something similar before.

#47 Posted by JordanElek (17887 posts) -

You might suppose that grinding for levels would boost your battle effectiveness, but Lightning doesn't gain levels, and there is no experience to gather.

Kevin Van Ord

This is what convinced me not to play this game. I liked XIII and XIII-2 primarily for their battle systems, and Lightning Returns seemed to put an interesting twist on it. But what's the point of combat outside of required fights if you get nothing for it?

I could deal with the other problems, but this ruins the game for me.

#48 Edited by Metamania (12018 posts) -

@LJS9502_basic said:

@Metamania said:

For those wondering what exactly the title is about, Kevin VanOrd reviewed the game and scored it 5 out of 10.

Granted, I've only played the demo,

If you only played the demo then you can't say 5 out of 10 was a good call.

As for the time issue.....from what I've read elsewhere it isn't a big deal. However....play what you want.

Oh YES I CAN AND I WILL. This board, along with any other board, allows me that right to speak my mind in any way I please. You're gonna stop me? No, you won't be. You have a right to say what you belive. So do I.. So no, that little argument of yours DOES NOT fly around here. I'll say what I want, when I damn please. You don't like it? Tough shit and if it pisses you off, this response of mine, I don't care.

And I'll play whatever I want, thank you very much!

#49 Posted by Metamania (12018 posts) -

@huerito323 said:

@Metamania said:

@huerito323 said:

Agreeing with a review on a game you haven't even played is idiotic. If the time limit bothers you, then the game is not meant for you. It doesn't make it a bad game because you can't deal with that. If I don't like violent games, I'm not going to shit all over GTA and call it a bad game. Many people that have already finished the game have had no problem with the time limit, and you can increase it by doing quests. The time limit is part of the game design, and you don't have to do every side quest on your first playthrough. There's new game+.

It's ridiculous how much hate this series is getting, all for changing things up and actually doing something different. Yet people complain when games stay the same. I feel bad for developers.

I'm not going to listen to this crap and your theory about violent games and GTA has no purpose being here. If you enjoy the game, that's fine, but if not, that's fine too. I've only played the demo from start to finish and can pretty much imagine what the rest of the game will be like for me. But to tell me that I agree with a review of a game that I haven't played is idiotic is a waste of time. I do what I want, when I please.

I played enough Final Fantasy XIII to know that it's one of the worst trilogies I've seen and even if Final Fantasy XIII-2 made some improvements, that doesn't mean it's a great series. Basically, what I'm telling you is that Square Enix screwed the pooch on FFXIII and in order to justify its existence, they had to shove it down our throats to make money when it's not even that good to BEGIN WITH. Why aren't people realizing that?

You sure do, and I'm not going to do anything about it except be the guy that tells you it's idiotic. If someone asks for an opinion on a video game they're thinking about getting, are they going to listen to the guy who just played the demo, or the guy who played the full game? The answer is simple and I don't even need to explain it.

They didn't shove anything down your throat, nor did they take your money. You've only played the demo remember? The people who buy it are the people that are fans of the XIII series. Move on already and stop being such a baby for no reason.

You don't need to ask me a stupid question like that and all you've been doing is wasting valuable time with. Quite frankly, you're wasting your time being here if you're attempting to convince of anything, because you haven't done an excellent job n it. You had your chance earlier on, but you blew it. So that's on you.

Also, let me remind you something; a demo is just a taste of things to come. Certainly, some, if not, a lot of things will be different. But this demo that I played is pretty much what I'll be expecting when I play the full version at some point in the future and I know, for a FACT, that the only thing that would get me to play the game would be for the battle system. That's it. The characters, story, atmosphere, everything around that, I would not be pleased with because SE killed any potential it had with the first game. So no, I don't need to play the full game if the demo holds up well enough to give me a good idea of the full game. If you're going to tell me that the demo is COMPLETELY different from the full game, then you got problems. But it SEEMS like you're intelligent enough to know the difference between the two, so that's all I have to say about that.

I'm done explaining myself here. That's it. All I asked from people was a question and you failed to do that. So again, pal, that's on you.

#50 Edited by Eikichi-Onizuka (8041 posts) -

The time limit doesn't really seem that bad with new game+ being an option. The demo did help me decide to wait until a price drop though.