Comment

For context I played the first one on NES when it came out. I liked how the different games each felt imaginative and a little different yet familiar due to certain common themes. I liked the games where the battles felt more tactical, like X, XII, and of course Tactics. I really like the setting of Ivalice, couldn’t say why but the setting is just appealing. I don’t like the turn the series has taken lately. XVI was a shallow action game and an even shallower RPG with paper-thin characters acting out a superficial imitation of A Game Of Thrones. I was way more invested in the character arcs of the cast of characters in VI than in the forgettable cast of XVI.

source

Sort:hotnew top

OrangeEnot@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
XVI looks like an Ivalice-setting game to me, but without the tactical approach of XII/Tactics. I enjoyed the story for what it was, but felt that the game tried too hard to be like one of the ~~cool kids~~ classic installations in the series. It didn’t have a new idea, a spark behind it, only a concept that it has to have all notable FF elements like familiar summons, moogles, enemies, weapons, etc. But it’s a good game overall, didn’t go through development hell like XV and sold well.

source
petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
I actually really liked 16’s main storyline. Not sure where I rank it, exactly, but parts of it were extremely cool.

What I did not like were the barrel-bin jrpg-tier sidequests where characters show up out of the blue because they’re supposed to be in this scene and “you really thought I wouldn’t see the two of ya’s slinkin’ off” was all I guess the project had the budget for.

I can’t tell you how many times it felt like a character would tell me to go somewhere to do a thing because they can’t go, and so I’d go do it, only for them to show up anyway so they could thank me with sad music.

It was just exhausting how shallow and uninspired most of the side content was.

source