Jump to content
LCVG

2003 was a very solid year for strategy RPG's


Crippler
 Share

Recommended Posts

When you think about it, there ha ve been a ton of strategy releases big and small in all categories...

 

GBA:

 

Fire Emblem

Advance Wars 2

Final Fantasy Tactics

 

PS2

 

Disgaea

Gladius

Dynasty Tactics 2

ROTK VIII

Culdcept

Bombastic

 

Xbox:

 

Goblin Coimmando

 

Personally I own Advance Wars 2 and Disgaea. Are the other games on the list worth checking out as well?( I don't play PC games)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know a lot of people found Final Fantasy Tactics really good.

 

And I know Glen will hit this thread eventually to praise up Fire Emblem, and I have to say that it looks like a very interesting game. If you read the latest GameSpotting on GameSpot, one of the editors has a very praiseworthy piece on it, detailing what he likes. It sounds like a winner to me!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What defines a RPG isn't always apparent to me, especially with a game like Kights of the Old Republic, which I thought had elements of an RPG but is listed on EB's site as an action game. If it fits the bill for RPG I think it should make this list.

 

Also, I haven't even seen the game, but is the LOTR Return of the King game an RPG? If so, alot of people seem to like that game as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, Pharm is right. I will come in here to tell you how much I'm enjoying Fire Emblem.

 

I'm only about halfway through the game at this point, but I'm really enjoying the depth that they put into the game. I can't recall a game in the last few years where I got about halfway in, made a mistake... and wanted to start the whole game over to correct it. Usually I just don't have the patience for that, but each time I play a battle, I'm learning how to get better and better in the game.

 

I had the same issues that Dogbert had with FFTA. I have about 15-20 hours into that game, and each mission now just seems like the same thing. Perhaps that's just me.

 

Glen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What defines a RPG isn't always apparent to me, especially with a game like Kights of the Old Republic, which I thought had elements of an RPG but is listed on EB's site as an action game. If it fits the bill for RPG I think it should make this list.

 

It's not a strategy RPG though, is it? It's a fairly traditional turnbased RPG, the combat is just dressed up with a psuedo-realtime option. The genre of "strategy RPG" usually contains a chessboard style landscape with the player controlling a squad of characters in a turnbased system. I don't think KOTOR falls under that genre at all.

 

EB is nowhere near a good guide of "Game genre". Go have a look at the classifications for the upcoming StarCraft:Ghost - each platform, although the same game, has a different genre!

 

Gama Sutra should have a postmortem article up soon about the development of KOTOR's combat system, it's interesting reading.

 

Also, I haven't even seen the game, but is the LOTR Return of the King game an RPG? If so, alot of people seem to like that game as well.

 

It's 100% action hack & slash. It has a "levelling up" system draped over it, but the game is 100% hack & slash.

 

And since when was Bombastic an RPG? I thought that was the sequel to Devil's Dice??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, I'm surprised to hear you guys are hitting the wall in FFT-A at the 15-20 hour mark. I, too, found that it got repetitive after a while, but it was only after I had beaten the main campaign and started in on the other 150 or so side quests. That was closer to 25 hours, though, if memory serves.

 

I do want to give Fire Emblem a try, especially because I'm kind of at a lull for GBA games. Your topic said "2003", but if you are open to older strategy games, I would recommend Tactics Ogre for the GBA as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, that jibes with my experience as well, then. I guess it's Glen that is getting frustrated earlier.

 

I think the problem (at least for me) is that once you beat the game, you really don't face many more battles with the possibility that you might lose or even have a character killed. That kind of takes the fun out of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm right around chapter 15 in Fire Emblem. While it's a lot of fun to play I can't help but think that there won't be a whole lot of variety to the missions.

 

I hate losing a character, though. I have actually restarted a chapter just to make sure I keep a character.

 

It's just different enough from Advance Wars that I'll happily play it through.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by PoisonJam@Jan 14 2004, 10:19 AM

Wow, I'm surprised to hear you guys are hitting the wall in FFT-A at the 15-20 hour mark. I, too, found that it got repetitive after a while, but it was only after I had beaten the main campaign and started in on the other 150 or so side quests. That was closer to 25 hours, though, if memory serves.

 

I do want to give Fire Emblem a try, especially because I'm kind of at a lull for GBA games. Your topic said "2003", but if you are open to older strategy games, I would recommend Tactics Ogre for the GBA as well.

 

I picked up Tactics Ogre a couple months ago. Great story and graphics, but the actual gameplay and battles are too slow and drawn out for my taste.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...