|
Post by Exhuminator on Oct 7, 2015 8:23:12 GMT -5
SMT: Nocturne is my most favorite PS2 JRPG. I went into it having never played an SMT game before. Matador of course gave me a brickwall for a minute, but the point of that fight is it forces you to learn how to properly use the Press Turn battle system. There are far harder bosses in the game after Matador, but his difficulty spike will always remain memorable. I finished Nocturne without using a walkthrough or strategy guide, and I'm glad I took that approach because it kept the game consistently challenging. The game really is a work of art and an unforgettable experience.
|
|
|
Post by Neo Rasa on Oct 7, 2015 9:59:17 GMT -5
Oh yeah Fog Breath is the spell, if you happen to get that never let it go, it will be useful for the entire game.
|
|
|
Post by hummy on Oct 7, 2015 11:07:58 GMT -5
How is SMT4 compared to the other mainline games in the series? It was the first non-spin off SMT that I played (although I never bothered to play after you're told to fill the Chalice of Hope) and I was a bit underwhelmed, to be honest since the narrative elements didn't seem like they were executed as well as they could be (and the late localisation in Europe probably contibuted to the disappointment as well). Do Nocturne/Strange Journey and SMT 1&2 perform better in that regard? I heard SMT4 is unique in the series as important parts of the story aren't hidden in random NPCs, so they probably take a more expositive approach, at least
|
|
|
Post by Neo Rasa on Oct 7, 2015 11:17:23 GMT -5
It depends on how you want when you say better. Like SMT1 and Nocturne are a bit more surreal and nightmarish - the disjointed story development and underwritten characters fit really well into that and it works. SMT2 is a bit more traditionally structured in a sci-fi dystopia but still has a very effective atmosphere. With SMT4 I think its length may be why the characters feel a bit empty. In the older games the length comes from challenging (and sometimes tedious) dungeon layouts but in SM4 there's actually many more story scenes and much more dialogue. But it's not as effective as few of the characters actually go anywhere.
I do think with Isabeau and a couple of other characters, they sort of painted themselves into a corner because of the twist/plot stuff they were designed around. But in general in SMT4 you're talking to people waaaaay more than in SMT1/2/Nocturne, but they don't have the extra development and depth to make all the extra conversation worth it.
|
|
|
Post by kaoru on Oct 7, 2015 11:25:02 GMT -5
I think a problem for SMT4 is that they tried for it to be main line SMT too hard. Like, not a single thing that happens in that game you don't see coming a mile away if you played the previous ones. I do like a lot of the callbacks, but maybe being a bit more experimental with the narrative would have been for the better, the feeling of it being a bit empty might be the lack of the teams own ambition in it? I dunno, or it really is just that it was way more wordy than the previous games, but didn't really offer more than what was in their approach, them bing more about the journey itself really.
|
|
|
Post by hummy on Oct 7, 2015 11:45:27 GMT -5
Ah, well by "better", I was trying to refer to characters and story events having a bit more depth behind them. Like, in SMT 4, it's clear where Jonathan, Walter and Isabeau all stand on the law, chaos and neutrality thing these games are known for, but you don't really see any reasoning they have for their beliefs or any events that particularly motivates them to think in a particular way. Walter's got a barely-mentioned reason for chaos because of being oppressed as a casualry before the start, but I can't think of anything for the rest of the cast. I think I'd probably enjoy the rest of the game a lot more if that one aspect was improved, since the setting was neat and some of the sub-plots were nice (like the whole deal about Issachar and Flynn's initial town near the beginning of the game).
|
|
|
Post by Neo Rasa on Oct 7, 2015 11:51:50 GMT -5
One could say that in a game filled with cardboard cutout cliches, Issachar Is A Character.
|
|
|
Post by Discoalucard on Oct 7, 2015 13:39:22 GMT -5
Nah that's pretty consistent with mainline SMT games. There's a reason why there's no in-game canon name for the Law and Chaos heroes in the original SMT, their alignment is their defining personality trait. Same thing with Nocturne, the "allies" (i.e. the other humans) really just exist as a representative of their philosophies. (And even then, none of them "join" you, you just run into them a handful of times over the course of the game.) The spinoffs (Persona, Devil Summoner) were created for more tightly narrative driven experiences (more plot development, strong characterization) while Nocturne, Strange Journey and SMT IV are a little more old school in their storytelling techniques. I think a problem for SMT4 is that they tried for it to be main line SMT too hard. Like, not a single thing that happens in that game you don't see coming a mile away if you played the previous ones. I do like a lot of the callbacks, but maybe being a bit more experimental with the narrative would have been for the better, the feeling of it being a bit empty might be the lack of the teams own ambition in it? I dunno, or it really is just that it was way more wordy than the previous games, but didn't really offer more than what was in their approach, them bing more about the journey itself really. I dunno, I thought exploring alternate Law/Chaos variations of Tokyo was a lot more interesting than discussing philosophies in the abstract like the other games to. But yeah, it does make the mistake of being kinda wordy without really saying a whole lot. It's no Golden Sun, at least.
|
|
|
Post by Échalote on Oct 7, 2015 14:24:28 GMT -5
SMTI/II's storytelling is very succinct but strangely enough, it actually works in their favor because the games' mise en scéne is so blunt that their twists hits you like an anvil. Also, if you plan to play the whole series, play SMT II BEFORE Nocturne, you can only understand the full meaning of a specific plot point with the knowledge of the previous game events.
|
|
|
Post by Ike on Oct 7, 2015 15:11:08 GMT -5
I ended up really not liking SMT4 but that was 90% because of the just ludicrously godawful world map and the fact that after all that build up it was Fucking Tokyo, Again. Is it such a big deal to have a game take place goddamn anywhere else?
|
|
|
Post by The Great Klaid on Oct 7, 2015 15:24:00 GMT -5
I ended up really not liking SMT4 but that was 90% because of the just ludicrously godawful world map and the fact that after all that build up it was Fucking Tokyo, Again. Is it such a big deal to have a game take place goddamn anywhere else? Well they did, and then decided it couldn't be SMT4.
|
|
|
Post by Ike on Oct 7, 2015 16:05:26 GMT -5
Strange Journey should have been SMT4.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 7, 2015 16:12:21 GMT -5
It doesn't bother me for it to always be Tokyo. That's just what SMT is. It was nice for Strange Journey to be set in a different location, but they made the right decision by categorizing it as an offshoot, rather than the next numbered iteration in the main series.
|
|
|
Post by Ike on Oct 7, 2015 16:16:38 GMT -5
It's not so much that it was Tokyo, it's that the entire first quarter of the game lures you in with this vaugely fantasy-like or medieval setting that seems cool and new, and then immediately dumps it all in favor of giving us... the same thing we've always had. It's like they almost tried to be creative and were like, whoa, no, wait a minute, we're getting too far out of our safe zone here. Pull it back! And then we get to navigate Awful Tokyo except it's dark all the time.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 7, 2015 16:22:03 GMT -5
I can see what you mean by that, but I enjoyed the fake out. If there's one thing humanity excels at, it's deluding themselves into thinking they're a lot more special than they really are.
|
|