Double Agent
The Long Winter - February 2, 2001 - Chris Jones

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed within this column are those of the participants and the moderator, and do not necessarily reflect those of the GIA. There is coarse language and potentially offensive material afoot. Groundhog Day used to mean something in this town. They used to pull the hog out and they used to EAT IT! You're hypocrites, all of ya'! Don't say we didn't warn you.

Not much on the gaming news horizon today, which seems somewhat odd in and of itself these days. Unfortunately that leaves me with a topic I really wasn't ever eager to contemplate: the death of Sega.

Ok, maybe "death" is too severe a word here, but it makes good copy. On the other hand, if you're a believer in the concept of souls, it's also a pretty good description of what's happened - Sega's given up their earthly form to live in peace and happiness in the third party afterlife. No longer shall things like "market share" and "target demographic awareness" trouble them - no, now they'll simply concentrate on doing what they do best. Making games.

I like the Dreamcast - right from the beginning it struck me as a more polished, more innovative, and more fun system than the PS2... but all things must pass. I'll enjoy whatever life the system has left in it, and suspect I'll keep playing it afterwards for much longer than I did my SNES or PSX. Cold comfort, maybe, but I'll take what I can get.

Onward.

It's ok, none of us have really come to terms with it yet...
Why didn't I actually write anything about the Death of the Dreamcast instead of just asking why there is no discussion? Because I'm still stupefied by it. I have still as of yet not decided of this is a good thing or a bad thing. I'm leaning toward good thing. I never really liked the look of the Dreamcast's graphics, they have sort of a blurry washed out feel to them. Even some of the nicest looking games on the system (such as Shen Mue and RE:CV suffer from this). I always liked the sharper look of the PS2s graphics or what we are seeing from the x-box and gamecube. Now I get to play Sega games on my PS2 so I'm happy. Still the Dreamcast was fun while it lasted.

--
BeerGoggles_FromMARS
Daniel Kaszor

I've already said my piece on Sega, but as ever, there are other opinions on the matter.

This is one of them.

Sorry, just drew a complete blank there...

We knew it was coming
Hey Chris!

"What about a perfectly ordinary kid who becomes near-omnipotent?"

Yeah, I think that'd work, it would be a Manoj Night Shyamalan-RPG. I seriously think it should be as thoughtful as his films, because then it would work best.

Oh, and about Sega : I'm not too depressed. When I bought my Dreamcast a month ago, I did so because of the games that were already out for it, and was fully aware I would have to buy at least a PS2 sooner or later. I think most of us knew by then that the Sega system wouldn't survive for long anymore, so the announcement didn't come at a great shock. Besides, there's still a chance for great DC software in the future because of the possible X-Box-copatibility.

Sir Farren, can't be bothered to be bummed.

There's no question in my mind that even as is, the DCs been a successful console in terms of quality, and well worth the money I put down for it. Although we don't tend to remember them, there are other dead consoles who would have killed for that kind of track record, which ain't bad.

And you're absolutely right about the X-Box possibly picking up where the DC left off. Much as I'd like to see this as some sort of master plan by Sega to keep producing their hardware by proxy, I don't think it is... but still, again, it's more than most other consoles ever managed.

You doubt my genius? You shall pay dearly for that... *Watchmen spoilers*
Chris:

I'm still not buying it. Dr. Manhattan would have broken the game--except that he quit because the game was beneath him (like any self-respecting god would). Rorschach was the hero (human, all too human).

I can't help but think that I'm woefully misunderstanding you. It seems to me that you're either asking for god-like powers that would necessarily break the game or for the same kind of skills with more impressive effects (in which case, what's the difference)--that the choice is between a broken game against numbers and the same game against numbers with prettier packaging.

How does your hero built of numbers and structural attack features (attacks vs. one enemy, physical element, for instance) differ significantly from a dragon built of numbers and structural attack features (like, oh say, slash-all, or attackX4, fire element)? And if there is a significant difference that I'm missing, didn't we already play that game, minus the superficial changes in character appearance, and wasn't it called Final Fantasy VII?

Or are the superficial changes in character what you're asking for? If so, haven't we already gotten that, numerous times? Ashley Riot the puppet stumbles into gaining god-like powers, Aya Brea discovers latent god-like powers, Zidane grows into latent god-like powers, Lenneth becomes Valkyrie, uses god-like powers to win/lose war between gods. Admittedly, there's a lot of human-centered stories out there, and a lot of transitional stories, but in the RPGs we have, god-like powers abound. What more are you asking for?

Enlighten me, please, 'cause I am so not seeing a distinction between what we've got and what you're asking for--so claiming "lack of imagination on the developer's part," from where I'm standing, smells really fishy.

--DarkLao

Come on, at the very least, think of this in terms of Watchmen if you're going to throw around the character names. Dr. Manhattan was, no two ways about it, a god. And he wasn't able to stop Veidt, despite the fact that there was nothing in the world more powerful than he was. (Of course, arguably nobody could have stopped Veidt because they weren't fated to, but that's a whole 'nother can of metaphysical worms.) And while we're on the subject, I defy anyone to read "Watchmaker" (Chapter 4) and not relate to Manhattan, despite the fact that he's omnipotent and largely unknowable.

Look, I'm not saying that I want some sort of Game Genie built in to the system, so that my character's just a normal character who happens to be invincible and can destroy anything in one hit, but still operating in a normal environment. That would break the game, no question. And I'm not saying I want a normal character with better graphical effects either - we're getting those all the time, and nothing changes. What I'm arguing for is a character who's head and shoulders above a normal human being - and makes the player feel that way too. Everybody keeps pointing out that Cloud wielded a sword much bigger than anyone should have been able to, but did he honestly strike anyone as being any stronger or tougher than the RPG knights who have been swinging swords for the past decade? Someone else pointed out in an email that in a game, you'll commonly have level 60 black mages backtracking through a dungeon to find a key. Why? Wouldn't they just be able to blow the door off its hinges with a Nuke spell?

How would you have any kind of challenge then, if you were able to do such miraculous feats? Ok, let's say you've got some sort of power bolt that can destroy pretty much anything in one blast... but how easy are your enemies to hit? You've got a mage who can destroy the entire demon castle with a single spell... but what if there are hostages inside? You know you can defeat the final boss without breaking a sweat... but what if he's disguised as one of the hundreds of townspeople you've talked to on your quest? How do you find him? Lastly, what if your enemy can do everything you can, but wasn't significantly more powerful? Wouldn't such a game come down to finesse, rather than "fight, fight, fight, heal"?

There are all kinds of ways to make this work - you don't have to be omnipotent from the very beginning (or really omnipotent at all) , and there are times when you might not be able to use your powers at full strength. Artificial constraints, true, but they should serve. I'm just saying I want a game that's more exciting than running around hitting people with a sword, or standing in a line and taking turns trading blows with monsters. I don't know all the answers, but I'm not a game developer - I'm not paid to spend my every working hour designing games. And you'll have to work hard to convince me that they can't find some way to really make this stuff rock.

Ok, I've said more than enough. End of rant, and end of topic.

Return of the Blue Bomber
Lunar 2 the last PS One game? Soulless wretch...you've forgotten Megaman X5, shipping as I type this. Being the ONLY game I've been looking forward to for quite some time, the carelessness of your omission can only be righted by a sledge hammer to your thumbs.

Snort.

SonicPanda

I'll take a look, but unless it differs significantly from the past 4 installments (yeah, right!) it's a rental at best. So keep the hell away from my thumbs.

Well I've just got to buy Zone of Enders now...
Hi Chris,

Square whore or not, Zone of Enders will make you crap in your pants!

Regarding my previous letter about Yamauchi, I've come to realize that he is, indeed, not quite 'brilliant.' (note: this is not a Yamauchi letter!)

1999, 2 years ago. DC, N64 and the PSX are all in the market. A new game is released for the Super Nintendo. Yes, the SNES. Fire Emblem 4.

This game series has been around for ever, and pratically made the formula for console strategy games, and inspired Hironibu Sakaguchi to create Final Fantasy.

Why has this game, with huge success in Japan, never been localized for a North American release? Why didn't Nintendo utilize Intelligent Systems earlier in the life cycle of the N64, and actually get Fire Emblem 64 to the market, rather than moving it to the GBA?

Why do I even have to ponder whether or not the GBA version will be released in North America? Nintendo should be milking Fire Emblem for everything it's worth. Sometimes, I really don't understand them.

I've imported and played as far into each Fire Emblem game as I could without being able to understand a single word of Japanese, and absolutely love the gameplay. If only I could enjoy the deep, epic storylines.

Am I alone here?

Graeme

You're largely alone here, I think, but it's not your fault - we're not all excited about Fire Emblem because we have nil experience with it here in the US, thanks to Nintendo, which is exactly your point.

And I think this is the key thing to remember when talking about Yamauchi's past decisions - the question is not "How good is Nintendo because of him?" but "How much better could Nintendo have been if not for his mistakes?"

They always did live on the edge
Dear Chris,

Sega pisses me off. As far as game development goes, they have some of the best minds in the industry. But from a buisness perspective, they come across as morons. They usually release they're systems before the other companies do, automatically making them the underdog in the long run. Then, when they're sales don't go exactly as they want them to, they just jump ship. After the death of the Saturn they should've thought about strictly going software. But they release a system, and now 1/2 years in, are going to jump ship again, with the Dreamcast. Now I know the Dreamcast sales arn't too great in Japan, but I wish Sega would just stick with it for a little longer. PSO has so far been a tremendous hit, and with Sonic Adventure 2 and Sakura Wars 3 coming out soon, sales should pick up a bit. But I know this isn't going to happen...damn Sega.

-Chris
a confused Sega fan

In Sega's defense, this may have been the only way they could ever have successfully operated... and it worked in the past. The Genesis was leaps and bounds ahead of the NES in technical quality, and years ahead of the SNES in release time. At least in the US, Sega was able to parlay that into a substantial market share. (And in Japan, if memory serves, the PC Engine was able to do a similar trick.) What's more, I don't think Sega ever had the strength to go head to head against Sony or Nintendo in a direct release - as much as I like the company, even I'd have second thoughts about picking Sega out of an evenly matched lineup. Sega took their best chance gamble with the Dreamcast... and it didn't work. But it was still worth trying.

Mess with a man's grammar, and you mess with his honor!
"I thought it a requirement for all DA's to read The Elements of Style!"

It is best to avoid basic possessive errors when sending a letter criticizing someone else's grammar, especially any "mistakes" by our DAs. ;]

-Ed M.

Here at the GIA, we all get very annoyed when someone questions our verbal abilities. I'm not saying this column is always perfectly written and free of grammatical errors, but when you invoke the holy book of Elements of Style, you better be damn sure of yourself.

This message was brought to you in the hopes of avoiding further pointless bloodshed.

50 gil for the dragon claw, 500 for that chocobo beak...
Mr. Jones,

You mentioned a while ago wanting the RPG money system to be handled in ways other than "gil droppings". I think there's a way to do this that would improve all aspects of the standard RPG encounter system: hunting. Allow me to explain...

First, you would need to get rid of random encounters. Now, think of Chrono Cross' komodo dragon hunt early on in the game and expand on it tenfold. For example, somewhere in the story, your characters learn the ability to skin animals, and hear of a trader who buys pelts, or processes them into armor or items. A whole system could be designed around the trapping of different creatures in various clever ways, making it fun and profitable to actually seek out encounters (hunt!). You would have to learn (by talking with others, discovering old texts, etc.) where and at what time certain creatures are active, and whether or not they can be chased down, lured, or otherwise forced into an encounter. Once encountered, the way that creatures are treated in battle could affect the quality of the pelt gained, adding a whole strategic twist to battle; the inferno spell and edged weapons that you can easily dispatch ice wyverns with ruin their pelts, forcing you to attack with less damaging clubs and lightning spells, making it a tradeoff between profit and difficulty.

This concept could be applied in various ways. Characters could later learn different "scavenging" abilities that would allow them to acquire different things from different creatures. The various items gained could also be put to different uses, some being simple pelts to sell to tanners, others being necessary reagents for spells, and all involving the use of character abilities and / or help from non-player characters. If implemented in a balanced(!!!) way, the whole thing could develop into a wonderfully intricate sort of integrated mini-game that... well, you get the point. Anyway, I think this treatment of the battle system could open up a world of possibilities. You wouldn't apply it to all battles, of course, but it would definitely add spice to the more common ones. What do you think?

-lowtech, who can only stand so much "kweh, kweh!, KWEHHH!"

Sounds good, despite the resemblance to FFT and Lufia 2. My main concern, however, is this - if there are moral qualms with Pokemon, a game in which animals are required to battle in non-lethal combat, what the heck are we supposed to make of a game where the main point is to attack and dismember wild creatures?

I think largely developers just need to exercise a bit of common sense. The reason we have monsters dropping gold all the time is because it's required to buy the newest, shiniest armor in the next town. If we made armor much more rare (and more important) then the occasional windfall of gold in a dungeon chest would be plenty to supply the heroes' financial needs, and it would make logical sense, too.

Just bite the bullet, dude
Has Square decided against a PC release of FFIX, every passing day, I fear that this is all too true.

WHAT THE HELL ARE THEY THINKING!?! Sorry, it's just that some of us heavily-devoted FFanatics out there don't happen to own a Playstation, heck, the fanciest gaming machine I've owned was a Gameboy. (the old 1 lbs type)

They sold a whole lot from the previous ones, abandoning us is a really bad move, I'm not going to wait until FFXI for something to show up on the PC! That's my take on it.

Redwolfe's gonna go calm down now. Hoping he's all wrong and dreaming such.

Redwolfe, pal, buddy... come on! Jeez, a used but perfectly workable PSX runs all of $50 now, if not much less, and will give you access to games like Chrono Cross that you'll never get on the PC. Suck it up and buy one already. It's true the PC ports of the last 2 FFs have sold well, and Square does need the money, but the FF PC ports have also been buggy as hell and not nearly as smooth a play experience as on the console. I hate to be such a snob about this, but as great a games machine as a PC can be, the only real way to enjoy FF is via the console. Get with the program already.

I'll waste my money however I wish, but thanks anyway
Chris,

I hate to burst your bubble and go off topic, but i want to save you $50! You said that you would probably buy The Bouncer, and that it looked really cool,etc. I've heard gamers accounts of the game only taking 90 minutes to beat with each character, of which their are four, I think. The battle systems m irrors Final Fight, and the environments are not interactive at all. So if you thought Parasite Eve games were short, you are really in for a surprise! I would just stick to renting it at best. That and respected publication EGM gave it 6's and 7's, so it's nothing special. I know you're going to say you could care less about the reviews, but the length should turn you off more than anything.

Xenodude-- Who heard Z.O.E is the second coming

Everything you say is largely true, as this article at videogames.com confirms. I just don't care. I was never a huge fan of Final Fight, or most of the Double Dragon sequels, but some of my fondest memories of games in the '80's were the original DD arcade game, and the little-played DD4 on the SNES. Beneath my placid nerd exterior lies a berserker warrior driven insane by testosterone poisoning, and the only way to appease him is to smash the crap out of some hapless guard in a straight-on street rumble game. (Those of you who are trying to relate that statement with my earlier omnipotence rant, don't bother. These ineffable contradictions of mine transcend your understanding. Really. I swear.) Besides, everybody else seems to have gone ahead and bought their "not a great game, but shiny and fun" PS2 title... this one's mine.

Closing Comments:

Drew's likely gonna have plenty on his plate dealing with all the carnage of this past week, but he deserves a topic of his own. So here it is: Think of what things'll look like 20 or 30 years down the road, when someone of our generation is in charge of companies like Square and Nintendo? Not in specifics, so much as what insights and goals someone raised on the NES might have that someone born long before video games were invented might not. Tell the man what you think, and I'll be back next week.

-Chris Jones, tired of games, gonna go eat some nachos

Recent Columns  
02.01.01
01.31.01
01.30.01
Double Agent Archives
Drew is Elvis. Shh, don't tell anyone, but send email.
Check the FAQ to see if you're asking the same question millions have asked before.