![]() XF has those too, to be sure, but they're more moderated, often coming with a stipulation. ![]() Those will be repeated over and over from beginning to end, and while there's nothing wrong with that, it rarely requires you to strategize as much as the game would like to imply that it does. Protect this guy while killing everything on the map. What the game does do is become a strategy game first and foremost. The game feels very familiar immediately. This makes sense given the battle system of the last two traditional Wild Arms games, and adds a small bit of series recognition to the game, but the practical impact is nonexistent. The game's biggest departure from genre conventions is that its play field is divided into hexagons instead of squares. It truely is a fantastic example of the genre, but it's immediately obvious that innovation isn't the reason why. Wild Arms XF, on the other hand, is a game that stands up and proudly exclaims "I am a strategy game!" Final Fantasy Tactics was more of a turn based combat game. What it's really about is customizing a cast of tiny people to your liking with a lot of familiar classes, and then obliterating the game handily by rolling your face over the controller. A classic example is Final Fantasy Tactics, and while that game is good in its own way, it's hardly a deeply strategic title. Many games that call themselves 'strategy' titles really aren't. ![]() ![]() "It truely is a fantastic example of the genre, but it's immediately obvious that innovation isn't the reason why. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |