Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
Don't think there's a need to. It doesn't contain any pirated content, but a fan game. As far as I'm aware, there is nothing wrong with that.
SE's cease-and-desist would likely have been unenforceable, anyway. But I believe there's nothing against people sharing an already-existing project like this.
There is a sequel in the series... but there isn't a direct sequel to Chrono Trigger. Chrono Cross and Radical Dreamers play with the themes of CT, and include takes on some CT characters, and a cameo of CT's main cast at one point, but they also change a lot of things, and are not direct story continuations of CT.
I did not know some one else picked up on it... and completed it.. Huwayy..
Like I said, it's a sequel in the series, in the general world... but it isn't a direct sequel to CT's story.
Crimson Echoes was very unbalanced. But Flames of Eternity changes the balancing to as you'd expect from the regular CT game.
I've certainly played CC, multiple times.
Edit: I'll add, Chrono Cross is one of my favourite games.
Having a recurring character (though, Cross has exclusively Masato Kato's take on Lavos) isn't all that it takes to create a full sequel. By that rationale, people could say that Final Fantasy games are story sequels because they contain Chocobos, and a bunch of other similarities.
I would say that Cross isn't a closely relatable experience to CT - and, according to writer Masato Kato, that was by design. While Cross' story is deep and interesting, it is in a different style. Chrono Trigger had more writers contributing to it and had different people directing it. Masato Kato also suggested that Cross could take place in an alternate timeline to Trigger, and I think he also said Cross is a story about loss (and CT isn't about loss).
So, while it ties into CT, Cross is largely its own thing, and more Masato Kato's project as opposed to CT being the result of a larger group of designers. And I can see how Cross can be viewed as a sequel in the series but not entirely one of Chrono Trigger - in a similar way to how Final Fantasy games aren't sequels to each-other but are additional games in a series that share certain themes. Cross has some closer story ties, though.
Basically because Crono and friends defeated Lavos, Belthasar was sent to a version of 2300 AD that was not in ruin. The humans in the future built Chronopolis with his help. Lavos through the Frozen Flame causes the Time Crisis and sends Chronopolis into the prehistoric era, and it is this event that causes Cross to be in a new timeline. This is also why El Nido doesn't exist in Trigger, it could only have been created after Lavos was defeated.
Having a specific writer's vision does not make something not a direct sequel. Movie franchises can have different directors and writers. If the work's story is directly built upon the story events of another, it is a sequel.
Fan-fiction can also be sequels. But them being written as sequels doesn't make them exist as canon together the original work it is following. There are different extents to which a thing can be a sequel.
When shows and movies have starkly different direction and writing, people can notice and it can raise questions among audiences whether the works fit together well. For example, many people don't regard the latest Star Wars trilogy as canon continuation of the original trilogy - and there are many incompatible story elements which people can argue make it irreconcilable with the original trilogy. Disney has even acknowledged people's issues with the newer films and said that it's up to each person what they want to take as canon or not.
Chrono Cross contains lots of wild ideas that aren't as refined and well-realized as Chrono Trigger's world, and Cross does have its own feel. That's largely a result of CT being the project of many people with great talent, while Cross is largely Masato Kato exploring his own ideas using CT's background, but also not grounding his new ideas entirely in CT.
There are many things that can make something a sequel beyond whether one work aims to continue the ideas of another. When a work is called a "spiritual successor", it doesn't even necessarily have to continue a previous work's story, but it can continue its ideals and style to produce something that feels like a continuation.
Conversely, something that is meant to be a continuation by someone working on it can lack the style, cohesiveness, and feel of the previous entry, and so create different impressions of whether it is actually a sequel.
In the sense that Cross comes after Trigger and is in the same series, yes, it's clearly a sequel. So is Final Fantasy 6 a sequel to Final Fantasy 5 in that regard. But Cross has more ties with the previous game than any FF has to the previous entry in the series.
But there's enough different about Cross, in its development team, its writing and gameplay style, its direction, that whether it's a direct sequel or not is something people have their personal opinions on. And I don't think there's an authority at SE telling everyone it's to be taken as a literal direct sequel, either, as even Masato Kato has said Cross aims to leave some things undecided and that what he sees as Cross' relation to Trigger can be different than what others see it as.
Since the writer of Cross doesn't want to force his take of the Chrono timeline onto others, that says there's room for questioning how close of a sequel it is - and that there isn't necessarily one right answer.
By the way, I love Chrono Cross and it is one of my favourite games.
@24:43
https://youtu.be/nTFprLPJ02U?t=1483
"[Chrono Cross] is generally considered a solid game, but its connection to Trigger is tenuous at best. As Masato Kato clearly stated, Cross is Cross, not Trigger 2."
The source for that quote would be from the interview that was on Yasunori Mitsuda's website, which is quoted here:
Chrono Cross Was A Bad Sequel, But A Brilliant Game
I feel that Cross is a bit distanced from Trigger and is a bit too dissociative for my liking. That difference with CT is because, during CT's development, Masato Kato's tendency to write depressing things was reigned-in by the rest of the team. He actually wanted to have Crono stay dead, but the rest of the team didn't want that. But on CC, Kato had free reign and those aspects of his writing weren't reigned-in - and I think that weakened Cross's story significantly in key moments.
But I love both Trigger and Cross. I hope there will be another in the series someday. But I wonder who would be able to design it.
Yes, but Kato is also obviously saying this for PR so informed people would be less critical of Cross's lack of fan service to Trigger. The approach Kato took to make his sequel story, was just something the mass audience of the time had never seen done before.
I will also bring up examples of Dark Souls 2 and the PS4 God of War, both games that have different stories and game mechanics from their predecessors. Both games are considered direct sequels.
And I don't like Disney's sequel trilogy for Star Wars either, but I still have to consider it canon for now. I mean there are things I don't like about Cross's story, such as the lack of character motivations and some odd story choices here and there. I've actually kinda wanted to do a sort of fan rewrite of Cross.