final fantasy XII VS Final fantasy XIII

Hi guys

what do you think best:

Final fantasy XII OR Final fantasy XIII

:winner:

You should have started posting your own opinion so we don't think this is a pointless thread created with no real purpose and just for the sake of it...

I'm also going to link you to our announcements:

http://www.epforums.org/announcement.php?f=33

Sigh, if you guys want to create threads like this, at least give it some thought.

One has a Viera, one does not.

I really liked the story and overall game improvements that the FF XIII series has had so far. My vote goes to FF XIII.

So you like linear hallways?

I dislike both. XII had a few interesting ideas, but did away with everything but the fighting, and XIII was an appallingly boring corridor-fightfest.

I'll give XIII-2 some props for at least improving on the faults of XIII, but

Spoiler warning:

WHICH IDIOT DECIDED ON A "TO BE CONTINUED" ENDING!?

Ruined the whole thing for me.

I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure XII marked the official beginning of the series' downfall. Some may argue that downfall started way sooner. I've never been a diehard FF fan but I've loved little aspects from certain FF games. XII for example has a way cooler art style than XIII in my opinion. It's the same style as Vagrant Story and it's set in the same world as Tactics.

I enjoyed 12 as it was quite diverse and the battle system was enjoyable, however with XIII i was left rather unimpressed. It was a really average wrapped up in Square-Enix glitz and gloss. FF hasnt been the game it was since IX.

Personally I would say IX as the first genuinely bad FF game, with a good story, but a sharp decline in gameplay design and presentation. The shear number of easy random battles really irritating and the boss battles felt much shallower than prior games, particularly VIII. Back on topic, anyway, XII was a return to the formula of my favorite FF game, II. And it pulled it off better than II itself did it, albiet with star wars references up the wazoo. XIII, like IX, had a story that was quite good, but the haste to tell the story as spectacularly as possible caused a failure on the gameplay design, though at least the balance was much more enjoyable than IX.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dr. Ivo Robotnik

I dislike both. XII had a few interesting ideas, but did away with everything but the fighting, and XIII was an appallingly boring corridor-fightfest.

I'll give XIII-2 some props for at least improving on the faults of XIII, but

Spoiler warning:

WHICH IDIOT DECIDED ON A "TO BE CONTINUED" ENDING!?

Ruined the whole thing for me.

---

Incidentally XIII was always planned as a serial game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aeolus Aeneas

One has a Viera, one does not.

---

This is the correct answer.

/thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dr. Ivo Robotnik

I dislike both. XII had a few interesting ideas, but did away with everything but the fighting, and XIII was an appallingly boring corridor-fightfest.

I'll give XIII-2 some props for at least improving on the faults of XIII, but

Spoiler warning:

WHICH IDIOT DECIDED ON A "TO BE CONTINUED" ENDING!?

Ruined the whole thing for me.

---

This.

/thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SydSelf

Personally I would say IX as the first genuinely bad FF game, with a good story, but a sharp decline in gameplay design and presentation. The shear number of easy random battles really irritating and the boss battles felt much shallower than prior games, particularly VIII. Back on topic, anyway, XII was a return to the formula of my favorite FF game, II. And it pulled it off better than II itself did it, albiet with star wars references up the wazoo. XIII, like IX, had a story that was quite good, but the haste to tell the story as spectacularly as possible caused a failure on the gameplay design, though at least the balance was much more enjoyable than IX.



Incidentally XIII was always planned as a serial game.

---

I've always been extremely fond of IX. Yes, it had its issues, but I feel it's immensely underappreciated. Of course, that's my opinion. :P

And I know XIII was planned to be a serial game, but they could at least do the players the courtesy of wrapping up the story within the game, as opposed to LITERALLY

Spoiler warning:

Slamming a black screen with white "To be Continued" text in the middle in our faces.

It's nothing short of pathetic.

Hi, new here, but I just saw this thread and having just played (and loved) Xenoblade Chronicles, this thread seemed pretty relevant.

As I was playing through Xenoblade I couldn't help but feel like I was playing an (almost) alternate version of FF XII, but something was off; I actually thoroughly enjoyed the former, while I couldn't wait to be finished with the latter. What gives?

To start, the license system. I couldn't stand it. Much like FF X, I felt the leveling system sort of drew away some of what made characters unique in other entries in the series. True, all characters would start off representing a specific class with the stats/armor/weapons they're given, but you could rather quickly change that by the way you manipulated the leveling system. I know it adds a level of freedom, but I feel it takes away from the focus that's traditionally involved in RPG characters.

The other, more irritating part was the gambits. I was literally told that if I wanted my party members to act competently, I'd have to pay for it. I felt like I had to farm for gear, pots, exp., and now, the overall intelligence of my party. To top it off, the system allowed you to basically remove yourself from the game by simply setting gambits to the party leader; you could even automate movement while in battle.

So yeah, between XII and XIII, XIII wins. That's not to say it's great, but at least it bought back some of the roots of the series. I won't lie, some of this is biased due to my preference of turn-based battling in most JRPG's.