Much better than Final Fantasy Tactics

[break]

There is a reason this game keeps getting remade.
Excellent story, battle system, and replay-ability.
The last part is key...FFT has a very linear story.
In that game you just grind for job levels and over power the weak CPU.
Tactics Ogre always put you in puzzle like formations
Where you have to find out what is the best way to position your party
To gain the advantage in combat.
I really hope they delay any plans for a FFT remake for a few years
To use this game as an example and make it a great game.

[Haddon]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von sorekara:

People may criticize FFT for its balance, missed / wasted potential, slow battles..
It still sets the standards of TRPGs that haven't been beaten yet.
Not just in terms of gameplay, it delivers a story with a quality that rivals movies and other JRPGs.
Tactics Ogre might be better as a game with its different route choices, but I think FFT delivers a complete story with the right pacing packaged in a single playthrough.

Oh man the story of TO is MILES ahead of the trite final act of FFT. It felt like Matsuno and crew made a TO-like game, and then Square came along and said "It isn't Final Fantasy enough, add more of that" just like they did with FF12 forcing in the airships.

[sorethroat]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Haddon:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von sorekara:

People may criticize FFT for its balance, missed / wasted potential, slow battles..
It still sets the standards of TRPGs that haven't been beaten yet.
Not just in terms of gameplay, it delivers a story with a quality that rivals movies and other JRPGs.
Tactics Ogre might be better as a game with its different route choices, but I think FFT delivers a complete story with the right pacing packaged in a single playthrough.

Oh man the story of TO is MILES ahead of the trite final act of FFT. It felt like Matsuno and crew made a TO-like game, and then Square came along and said "It isn't Final Fantasy enough, add more of that" just like they did with FF12 forcing in the airships.

Well I'm glad he did that, since it is a Final Fantasy game after all. Matsuno did a great job at combining the fantasy aspects of FF with a medieval drama.

As I said before, Tactics Ogre's brilliance rely too much on the dynamic aspect of the story choices. If you take a single route from the game, can you say it is better than FFT's whole story?

[Haddon]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von sorekara:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Haddon:

Oh man the story of TO is MILES ahead of the trite final act of FFT. It felt like Matsuno and crew made a TO-like game, and then Square came along and said "It isn't Final Fantasy enough, add more of that" just like they did with FF12 forcing in the airships.

Well I'm glad he did that, since it is a Final Fantasy game after all. Matsuno did a great job at combining the fantasy aspects of FF with a medieval drama.

As I said before, Tactics Ogre's brilliance rely too much on the dynamic aspect of the story choices. If you take a single route from the game, can you say it is better than FFT's whole story?

I think the Law route is, yes. I think the character development of Denam, Katua, Vyce are fantastic, and I think that Tartaros and most of the Dark Knights (a few, hammer or axe-wielding exceptions) weren't just evil, they were more...grey characters than we get from most of the FFT enemies. I think Denam is a much more interesting character than Ramza, though I think Delita is a better character than Vyce. I also think the Tartaros/Hamilton Lodissian/Zenobian rivalry was more fleshed out and interesting than the "Lions" in the eponymous War of the Lions. And the world of Xyteginea is a bit more interesting than Ivalice, I think.

Plus. Queen references.

[break]

The Tokyo Game Show news really nails my point in.
This game is going way beyond what the PSP release could ever achieve.
Buckle in folks...you are looking at the new 2022 Game of the Year.
These new quality of life changes are amazing.

[break]

Yo, three more days until best tactics game every created (with QoL improvements)
Returns for all to enjoy once again !!
From the review copy previews, the improved AI
Appears to be smarter than even Triangle Strategies.

[Sen]

Loved both games, but TO is far and away the superior title (in my humble and honest opinion). The strategy, story, and sheer amount of gameplay in Tactics Ogre (based on PSP remake) just blows FFT out of the water. I'm excited for this remake to bring one of my all time favorite titles to a wider audience.

[Pickleton]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von toughnails:

You can easily tell which fanbase is insecure.

FFT players don't even think about TO, it just doesn't register on their radar. But TO fans constantly compare their game to FFT, and some like OP even try put it down in a misguided attempt to elevate TO.

Actually, tactics ogre was much more of a success here in Japan than fft. I also think fft fanbase never heard of tactics ogre because a good amount of them are final fantasy fans rather than srpg fans.
But that's just my take.

Personally I played tactics ogre first (well, March of the Black Queen on SNES), so FFT just felt like a cheap imitation. The characters all felt so unimportant, and what little personality they had goes out the window once they join your party, since from then on theres a danger they could be dead so cutscenes ignore them. Tactics Ogre your other characters are constantly adding flavor to cutscenes and even banter during battles. FFT also felt so slow in fights with the frame rate you had to mod to fix. Tactics Ogre also has mp that scales up as a resource throughout fights instead of a finite resource you have to use consumables to replenish, which appeals to my "hoarding items" mentality.

Also lol at whoever said just level up to beat the story of TO. Sounds nice until you accidentally trigger CODA level scaling and soft lock your game. Meanwhile FFT you could just ninja with monk fists and 1 shot everything without grinding, and that's before you even get Agrias or Cid.

[pristine20]

The likes of Orlandu (given for free) and Calculator (unnecessary) trivialize any "tactics" in final fantasy "tactics". TO is more difficult to break and hence, the better game

[darkholyPL]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Pickleton:

FFT also felt so slow in fights with the frame rate you had to mod to fix.

That was only a problem in the PSP version of the game, that came out in 2007, a whole decade after the original for PSX, that did not have this problem.

Ursprünglich geschrieben von pristine20:

The likes of Orlandu (given for free) and Calculator (unnecessary) trivialize any "tactics" in final fantasy "tactics". TO is more difficult to break and hence, the better game

You'd get Cid late game and Calculator took time to unlock. First time playing the game without a guide of any sort I didn't even ulock it.
Meanwhile you get Archers in TO form the start....

[Pickleton]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von darkholyPL:

Meanwhile you get Archers in TO form the start....

You get monks and potentially ninjas very early, and I'd say dual-fist ninjas are far more broken in that game than archers were in TO PSP version. Pretty much from the second you unlock the ninja, they have the potential to 1-shot everything, including almost all bosses. They even came with free self/ally healing and revive built into their kit ...
Archers weren't all that special in TO chapter 1 or even chapter 2. In fact, they didn't really have a huge advantage (unless you were running full team of archers to squeeze the concentrated exp) until about end of chapter 3 or beginning of chapter 4, when you started getting better bows with better skills on them (particularly the siege bow). As CoffeePotato has said in a few videos: archers in TO are a terrible class, they just have access to the best weapon. You also need to buy skills before they hit their stride, which you're not doing until later unless you're grinding, but if grinding counts, then FFT even more broken on account of being able to just sit down and grind out until you have calculators, whereas TO gear is gated by progression ...

The slowdown was more than just the PSP version's framerate. The slow pace on the move command. The length of magic animations and the charge time required. The fact that the maps were so often full of obstacles but characters could only walk like 3-5 tiles at a time, which often made you have to kinda zig-zag around until you taught everyone teleport.

[darkholyPL]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Pickleton:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von darkholyPL:

Meanwhile you get Archers in TO form the start....

You get monks and potentially ninjas very early, and I'd say dual-fist ninjas are far more broken in that game than archers were in TO PSP version. Pretty much from the second you unlock the ninja, they have the potential to 1-shot everything, including almost all bosses. They even came with free self/ally healing and revive built into their kit ...
Archers weren't all that special in TO chapter 1 or even chapter 2. In fact, they didn't really have a huge advantage (unless you were running full team of archers to squeeze the concentrated exp) until about end of chapter 3 or beginning of chapter 4, when you started getting better bows with better skills on them (particularly the siege bow). As CoffeePotato has said in a few videos: archers in TO are a terrible class, they just have access to the best weapon. You also need to buy skills before they hit their stride, which you're not doing until later unless you're grinding, but if grinding counts, then FFT even more broken on account of being able to just sit down and grind out until you have calculators, whereas TO gear is gated by progression ...

The slowdown was more than just the PSP version's framerate. The slow pace on the move command. The length of magic animations and the charge time required. The fact that the maps were so often full of obstacles but characters could only walk like 3-5 tiles at a time, which often made you have to kinda zig-zag around until you taught everyone teleport.

You're all over the place. You use one argument to fit your agenda, then twist the same fact if it doesn't.
For example you argue that you could get OP units and ninjas ect. in FFT very early if you wanted, but you at the same time say that Archers in TO were not a good unit.
They were an excelent unit early and mid game. They did fall off late game somewhat, ture, but that's late game.
You can't say this is op early game in FFT, and then just go, 'yea in TO the are pretty bad at max level'.
That's just hypocrisy at best and being dishonest at worst.
Truth is you had broken things in both games. Let's just not start counting the way you could break each game.

[Sardorim]

FFT looked and played better, but I liked the ending of TO much better as FFT ending is ambiguous and kinda... doesn't give a satisfying conclusion to Ramza and his team. They just disappear even though Word of God said they managed to get out of hell.

FF14 did offer an alternate timeline of FFT where they didn't leave hell but became seals and challenged those that would try and finish what they couldn't to see if they were worthy.

[pristine20]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von darkholyPL:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Pickleton:

FFT also felt so slow in fights with the frame rate you had to mod to fix.

That was only a problem in the PSP version of the game, that came out in 2007, a whole decade after the original for PSX, that did not have this problem.

Ursprünglich geschrieben von pristine20:

The likes of Orlandu (given for free) and Calculator (unnecessary) trivialize any "tactics" in final fantasy "tactics". TO is more difficult to break and hence, the better game

You'd get Cid late game and Calculator took time to unlock. First time playing the game without a guide of any sort I didn't even ulock it.
Meanwhile you get Archers in TO form the start....

I don't know but Archers in TO are nowhere comparable to Cid. In fact, you have to know to only play the Archer to help your odds by stacking exp and even then, I'd still argue that they are still nowhere near as powerful as Cid who you get for free with no special requirements and he can solo the rest of the game.

Can a TO archer do anything close to that? Not to even mention calculator. Nothing in TO compares to how broken those two are and it doesn't even take any strategy to use them unlike TO archers.

[Maroxad]

One of the things I really like about TO vs FFT is the number of units you can deploy in any given map. 5 people really limits your options.

[Haddon]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von darkholyPL:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Pickleton:

You get monks and potentially ninjas very early, and I'd say dual-fist ninjas are far more broken in that game than archers were in TO PSP version. Pretty much from the second you unlock the ninja, they have the potential to 1-shot everything, including almost all bosses. They even came with free self/ally healing and revive built into their kit ...
Archers weren't all that special in TO chapter 1 or even chapter 2. In fact, they didn't really have a huge advantage (unless you were running full team of archers to squeeze the concentrated exp) until about end of chapter 3 or beginning of chapter 4, when you started getting better bows with better skills on them (particularly the siege bow). As CoffeePotato has said in a few videos: archers in TO are a terrible class, they just have access to the best weapon. You also need to buy skills before they hit their stride, which you're not doing until later unless you're grinding, but if grinding counts, then FFT even more broken on account of being able to just sit down and grind out until you have calculators, whereas TO gear is gated by progression ...

The slowdown was more than just the PSP version's framerate. The slow pace on the move command. The length of magic animations and the charge time required. The fact that the maps were so often full of obstacles but characters could only walk like 3-5 tiles at a time, which often made you have to kinda zig-zag around until you taught everyone teleport.

You're all over the place. You use one argument to fit your agenda, then twist the same fact if it doesn't.
For example you argue that you could get OP units and ninjas ect. in FFT very early if you wanted, but you at the same time say that Archers in TO were not a good unit.
They were an excelent unit early and mid game. They did fall off late game somewhat, ture, but that's late game.
You can't say this is op early game in FFT, and then just go, 'yea in TO the are pretty bad at max level'.
That's just hypocrisy at best and being dishonest at worst.
Truth is you had broken things in both games. Let's just not start counting the way you could break each game.

Don't bother trying to argue with Pickleton. In his own mind, he is right, no matter what. He can be given absolute proof, logical argumentation, and get caught in multiple lies and he won't accept he is wrong.

I don't understand this "archers fell off late game". No, they absolutely did not. They just became more necessary to use specifically, targeting squishies or using their guaranteed knockback.