timrod's Final Fantasy Tactics A2: Grimoire of the Rift review

I’ll be the first to admit that Final Fantasy Tactics Advance sucked.

The first? Haha, yeah right.

Isn't that just a saying? I don't think he meant it literally.

FFTA did not suck, but this review is ok. HOWEVER.

Not only did it have a lame and cliched storyline. Not only did it have bullshit-hard gameplay that revolved around wandering judges making such laws as “no using physical attacks or magic” or “no doing anything for the first fifteen turns”.

Might want to check those sentences.

So when I heard about Final Fantasy Tactics A2, the sequel for FFTA on DS, I was left to question how bad the game could really be.

Thanks for clarifying that FFTA2 is the sequel to FFTA. And you made it sound like FFTA is on DS.

FFTA2 takes the worst parts of its predecessor and combines them with even worse ideas and a new even more convoluted class system to make the worst RPG ever.

And it gets a 4/10. And it's not a RPG.

Take, for instance, a law like “no knocking your opponents back”. Knockback is a side effect of a critical hit, which you have absolutely no control over. Failure to obey the law means that you can no longer revive your characters, meaning that you will most likely fail whatever mission you’re on.

I DONT NEED NO STINKING STRATEGY IN MY STRATEGY GAMES.

One particularly hated mission has a law preventing you from doing more than 50 damage at once. By this point in the game, your weakest physical attacker will probably do several hundred damage, meaning you get to throw your mages and other squishies at the hordes of mogs with cannons firing on you. Of course, you could just break the law and nuke the everloving crap out of the cannoneers with ranged attacks and magic.

I DONT NEED NO..

If you like the crap Square has been shoving down the throats of RPG fans worldwide, or are a twelve-year-old mouthbreathing yaoi fangirl who thinks that Final Fantasy 7 is the best game ever and that Square-Enix invented video games, then go ahead and buy it.

Trolling is fun. Fun is trolling.

I must admit to some surprise at saying the original sucked, that this one is worse and in fact the worst RPG ever, and then ending up at a forgiving 4. Why not go all the way?

I didn't go all the way because as much as the game sucks and is a generic Square-Enix math sim, there's no horrible bugs or glitches that make the game unplayable.

The review lost all credibility when timrod pretty much revealed he had no idea what FFTA was like, with all the lame exaggarations. And he seems to have no idea what genre of game he's playing, either.

Actually, yeah I do. FFTA2 is what I'd call a generic Square-Enix rehash math simulator. You know, the kind S-E comes out with fifty times a year. And FFT Advance really WAS that bad. Yes, I have played it. Marche was whinier than Squall, and had absolutely zero redeeming factors about him. The game can be summed up in three lines of dialog.

Marche: "Oh so here's Ivalice oh look my brother isn't crippled and that guy that got hit in the face is a knight or something."

Retarded new design Moogle: "Hi Marche! I'm a moogle! Want to be friends?"

Marche: "You don't exist. Fuck this, I'm going home."

Rest of the game was basically single-player FFXI. Grind until you're high enough level to grind higher level monsters, and keep grinding until you kill the generic boss at the end.

Just keep in mind that Square-Enix comes out with 'retarded math simulators' more like once a year. Also remember that the retarded math simulators are PRECISELY what their fans are asking for. So really, most of your objections are valid to someone who hates the kind of game that Square's fans want them to make, but aren't really relevant to most people who would be reading the review.

Honestly, I think this is the worst review you've ever written. You're a good writer, but your passion and apparent hatred for Square-Enix (or at least their take on this genre) really got in the way of what had the potential to be another good review.

It communicates well enough your hatred for the franchise, but persuasive writing it is not.

there's no horrible bugs or glitches that make the game unplayable.

Without meaning to be difficult (well, maybe a little), is that not plenty to exclude it from being the 'worst RPG ever'? Because I've played my share of broken ones. No need to look outside the system or genre either, Hoshigami Remix is right there to compare unfavorably to any DS tactics RPG that actually works, even if it does nothing of interest.

I'm wondering why you even played this in the first place, Timrod. Did you expect you would enjoy it? I didn't like FFTA either, so at least I have the sensibility not to spend forty bucks on its sequel.

It's pretty obvious that he uses a flashcart.

yeah, I think the only things the guy has legitimately bought in his life are a parrot and an eyepatch.

Venter, come on. you know I love you, but you're basically saying the game is immune to criticism because some people like it. guess I better stop hating on Madden rehashes and Mario Party 11 then.

That last paragraph was pretty sweet. That is all.

No, I'm saying that criticizing a game for doing the very things it was designed to do--that it SHOULD do, that fans WANT it to do--is pointless. It's the reason you don't see me playing and reviewing Madden games. I know what those are supposed to do--simulate the American football experience down to the dullest details--and I know what excites the fans of those games. None of it appeals to me in the slightest.

That's why I haven't played or reviewed those games and, since a similar principle applies here with timrod and FFTA2, it's why I'm confused as to why he would choose to review it. A blog or forum post on how he hates Square-Enix and Final Fantasy Tactics Advance games would be a lot more useful in this case than a review of a game he was never going to give a fair chance.

You don't think someone's opinion on a genre they dislike is as valid as someone who will automatically give the game glowing praise?

No one out there is unbiased, Jason. Everyone has an opinion, even if it's removed from the norm.

You don't think someone's opinion on a genre they dislike is as valid as someone who will automatically give the game glowing praise?

That's a pretty reductive and unfair way to put it. No one should automatically be doing anything. This review could have been written without having played the game; it could have been written before the game was even released. Any review that does not judge a game on its intrinsic merits, good or bad, is not effective. You're supposed to be reviewing the game, not the genre or its developer.

While this is somewhat true, how can you review a game without the genre taking heavy effect? Let's take another route:

Let's assume Timrod had come into this review wearing his dislike of TBSs on his sleeve. However, he then said that this was a game that swayed his initial dislike and he like it regardless of his usual tastes. You see this tactic a lot in reviewing -- I fancy most of us have used it ourselves at least once -- yet is this called out when employed?

There's nothing wrong with saying "I don' t like this genre and, so, I don't like this game" just so long as you still go ahead and back up your points.

...Which is what he failed to do.

Psychopenguin graciously wrote my thought out for me in his earlier post though. Thanks for that!