Janelle Hindman has completed Final Fantasy XIII and reviewed it. In her opinion, the good slightly outweighs the bad as she gives it a "Very Good" ranking.
they kept all the good ideas for final fantasy versus xiii =)
I don't know much about Versus XIII. Please tell me the good ideas :D
Versus has alot more promise, FF13 was made as a safe bet it didn't take to many risks and Versus is trying something different.
That's the way i like someone who uses the full 10pt scale.
is there any more pictures of FFversusXIII ingame shots? Iv never seen that screen.. if you have more please post the links..
FF XIII was just to sell and to move some PS3's FF versus XIII on the other hand is the real deal
Like I said yesterday, this game WILL get murdered in reviews here in the west. The main reason is most reviewers will not play the 40 hours required for the game to become it's full potential. Ch11-13 are like an entire awesome FF game in itself. The first 10 chapters are just a drowsy filler of a mess. Glad to see she completed it. I'm sitting at a solid 8/10 for it in my book right now, and depending on how the ending fairs it might get a bump to higher 8.X, but if it blows well 7.X here we come. :/ There is a lot of good things here in this game... it's just a shame SE didn't spread it out over the course of the game and instead just dumped it on you at the very end. It ruins pacing to say the least.
Are you kidding zlatko? All big review sites go with the flow and base scores on reputation of a series. Every FF game released has always had good reviews from the west. FF13 will be no different.
@Cartesian3D No in-game footage except Nocits and stella first meeting which is a year old video http://www.gametrailers.com...
Why didn't the review mention the Open World exploration? Considering how this Game has been criticised falsely for its lack of exploration I find it amazing how the reviewer didn't try to debunk that myth... http://www.youtube.com/watc...
Thank the FF-FAns who bit_ched about FFXII. IMO its open world was the best, gameplay was the best,even Story was good but thanks to the bit_ching they changed everything back instead going forward .
Even if this game gets mediocre reviews its still a day one purchase for me. Iv waiting so long for it!
the reviewers dislikes had nothing to do with the new ideas and more to do with the lack of old ideas (towns) and poor story telling/dialogue, which has been a problem in general with a lot of JRPGs lately. Removing towns sucks. They really made the world feel more alive. sucky. The new battle system does look pretty sweet though.
I'ved played the game, it's at least a 9. I don't know where the hate from this game is come from but...weird.
"Replay Value - Bad" That's a lie, this reviewer CHOSE to stick to the story and do nothing extracurricular that was present in the game. She beat it in 47 hours but just yesterday I was watching this feed http://www.justin.tv/rrrrui and he's 91 hours in after all the post game missions and activities (chocobo treasure hunting ect.) I'll tell you one more thing, the after game missions and unlockables are worth the time, this guy does moves and fights enemies you'll never see 47 hours in. And it all looks fantastic.
if a game "requires" a 40 hour wait for it to become good. Does said game deserve a 9 or 10? f**K no.
How many hours did you put into previous final fantasy's? 40 hours is nothing in those games, it's like playing less than half a game.
@zlatko No, big sites/magazines will finish the game before they give a score. I never heard of RPGLand, so I am not giving too much credit to this review. @FamilyGuy No... he is right. If you aren't having fun with the game and you have no clue of what this game is all about after 40 hours then it's not for you or the game has a bad storytelling. You won't know everything about the storyline in 40 hours but I NEVER had to play a Final Fantasy game for 40 hours to know if it's an incredible game or has a bad storytelling. BTW, I am playing Final Fantasy since the NES era.
If Versus is better than FF13 then it'll be downplayed since it's an exclusive like the many others. "Eventhough teh battle systemz is great and innovative it failz cuz it's not subpar," or something like that.
Stupid SE, they're making so much mistakes, if this game don't make a good job in Europe or America on 1 of the 2 Consoles or both, Sony will definitely need to buy some Stocks or SE will fall, this is the best seller game for SE in a long time and everyone is killing it
@Hisiru Um, there's a picture in the review of her postgame save file...
And? I will wait for some big magazine or website like IGN, and then we will have a real score.
Well you made a remark that seemed to imply the game not having been finished so I thought I'd point that out. I apologize if that's not what you meant ^_^ I think in general there's too much focus on numbers here, because they're all different things to different people. To me, the text is what matters. Only thing I can say is that IGN lost me more than once, one big step in their decline being the FFTA2 review a while back. Basically just a features list or preview x_X http://ds.ign.com/articles/... I don't think it's the review outlet so much that matters as the individual review and the text of said review. If the review sounds like something that resonates with you, then hey, you'll probably agree. If any given review's negatives are things you don't mind and its positive points are things are not, then you'll probably disagree. Just how it goes. :)
I see this game as being one that is better then the reviews say it is. But, this is not a bad review. The 7 means that it is "very good" and even in the opening paragraph the author writes: "Despite some poor design decisions, though, Final Fantasy XIII is worth playing, even if it isn’t a must-play." From what I gathered (I'm not reading that whole thing), the game is good but not mind blowing. And frankly, I was going to rent it anyway.
it's becoming increasingly clear that this isn't the next-gen FF i was looking forward to (i.e. open world navigation,100hrs gameplay,jaw-dropping graphics). Whether it is due to limitations imposed by the multiplatform decision or SE's incompetence, this is looking like GTA4 all over again...taking a big step backwards (yes i did enjoy FF12 ALOT, esp. the Mark Hunting quests even though i was bitterly disappointed with the story...it had such promise sigh~)
well, according to their review system (which is very different from most peoples' i think) they thought the game was very good. for example, a 5 from them is considered average and is not a bad score, read their review system for any consolation http://rpgland.com/criteria...
can i be more disappointing?
"^You're a joke How many hours did you put into previous final fantasy's? 40 hours is nothing in those games, it's like playing less than half a game." are you an idiot? the difference between past final fantasy's and this one is that the old ones drew you in during the first hour while having 100's of hours of gameplay. to have to wait 40 hours? It's no wonder why mediocrity sells nowadays. nutcases like you are completely oblivious to reality.
http://img75.imageshack.us/... ^ I don't get it. @_@ What am I looking for?
Old school map world
I hope they judge this game hard. I guess the story is meh, I'm getting from this review.
Isn't the game practically shovelware without the climactic story though... This is why pure RPGs are dying and square/enix wanting to milk DLC will only add insult to its injuredness. 7/10 sounds about right, with no online... Oh right, they have that other game that milks subscribers, wouldn't that look foolish.
I don't know, for all the praise he has been giving through the entire review a 7 seems kinda low... He likes everything about the game except for the story. So the author deducted 3 points just because the story's bad?