
Originally Posted by
Ayn
That's a very good point that I think some people overlook. Another example I can think of is Magna Carta 2: Even though the second game is nothing like the first one, and ten times better than the first game (I liked both), many people had such a bad experience with the first that I imagine they passed it over. Similar things can be noted of Hyperdimension Neptunia.
It's also hard to assess some of these games fairly based on where we were at in our lives then versus now: For one, there weren't nearly as many RPGs available then as there are now. And heck, even if there were, I'm not sure if many people here would have had access to them to be pickier (in terms of having a job that could pay for them or being able to download them as easily).
I think both are good games in their own rights, but (I'm sure I'm getting repetitive here), I think part of what annoyed people about 13 was how it turned out for being so long in development.
The discussion's interesting though and it pinpoints one of the key things about FF games -- most of them try something different or put a slight spin on things they've tried before. It's pretty rare for me, at least, to hear people say they completely hated every component about <insert FF game here> (unless it's 8; that seems to be a popular one to hate on). . there's usually -something- about them people like, if not the game as a whole.