Jump to navigation
Advertisement

Wild Arms 4 Review

PlayStation 2 Review by Simon Parkin

4 October, 2006

The Wild Arms series is videogame beige. Viewed with a critical eye these are the blandest of RPG games, each barely characterised by unremarkable features, less-than-one dimensional characters, insipid storylines and unrelenting cliché.

Even viewed generously, the Wild Arms franchise avoids imagination and creativity at each turn in its embarrassing aping of Final Fantasy - a remarkable fact perhaps, but a far from interesting one. And viewed blindly, which is presumably how the swathes of fans that have promoted the brand to multi-million-seller look upon it, it's surely nothing more than a consistently average way to pass those time-rich teenage years.

And for this, the fourth game in the shuffling, near-pointless lineage, the series' one distinctive element, its wild west setting, is diluted beyond note, bringing the devolution of the Wild Arms concept to a most lacklustre conclusion before the game even starts.

Opening with the destruction of 13-year-old boy Jude's hometown village, an act which thrusts him into the spiky arms of an unfriendly and threatened world, Wild Arms 4's narrative pathway couldn't be deeper furrowed if it led straight from the shire to the gates of Mordor. Jude is immediately paired up with Yulie, a weak magic user you must protect that the empire wants to capture for secret and clearly-dastardly-but-not-in-that-way-you-filthy-reader reasons. Two other forgettable but clichéd supporting-cast members complete the set and it's business as it ever was.

'Wild Arms 4' Screenshot review

Essentially, this is our review too.

The hotchpotch of ill-explored plot-ideas - each stolen from other myths and games - forms a most uneven and ill-fitting tapestry; one that an awkward translation of a clearly diabolical original script serves to cut into ugly ribbons. This is a serious problem, as the game is peculiarly verbose thanks the delivery of large chunks of back-story on screen as expansive portions of written disembodied text.

The vacuous moral of the story, punched through the player's head at every opportunity by ineloquent NPCs, is that childhood is a time of innocence, purity and goodness and adulthood a time of malevolence and evil. Such nonsense fails to move the player at every scene, and when characters repeatedly advise on a course of action and then act in the opposite way, it's never to make a point - but merely to serve a weak scriptwriter's ill-judged purpose.

The gameplay itself aims for higher innovation but without exception these feel like prematurely-birthed ideas. The battle system works on a rudimentary honeycomb system - seven hexagons upon which each all the units are placed - and boasts the bombastic moniker, the Hyper Evolve X-fire system. Unfortunately in practice it's less exciting. Some of the spaces have elemental properties (Ley Points) and most attacks can only be aimed at adjacent panels. Friendly units can't occupy the same space as enemy units, but more than one unit of the same side can - and as attacks are aimed at spaces rather than individuals, carefully bunching and dispersing characters is key to success. Despite the welcome invention, it's a limited system and besides, Strategy RPGs have been playing the same tricks but over whole map grid systems for twenty years. The overly-generous occurrence of random battles, their easiness and the sheer tediousness of the identikit opponents and their attacks soon drains any fun therein.

'Wild Arms 4' Screenshot vodka

Squint hard and drink loads of Vodka and this could be a screenshot from Ico. Unfortunately, you'll need to stab your eyes out and get a Smirnoff drip to make the games play the same.

In another effort to add distinctiveness to the gameplay, developer XSEED has thrown in rudimentary platforming to the field sections of the game. Your lead character has a double jump, crouch and stomp move a la Klonoa and, in order to harvest each and every item the player must explore each environment using this set of tools. But the implementation of the idea is shoddy and bespeaks a developer trying moves outside of its limited repertoire - especially when compared to likes of, say, Threads of Fate, which tried similar RPG-crossover tricks to much better effect on the PSone. In fact, many sections of this part of the game feel plain amateurish, something exacerbated by the lack of invention in the key and fetch quests and intervening dialogue.

It would be easy to score this game as plain mediocre. After all, it essentially works, displays a misguided and seemingly half-hearted attempt at innovation, looks pleasant enough, passes the time and will likely meet the low expectations of its surprisingly large fanbase. But should such calculating mediocrity be continually excused? Perhaps it's time for the critical honesty this game continually calls for in its awkward and unstoppable meting out of prepubescent morality.

4/10

Read our Scoring Policy

Advertisement

Are you excited about Wild Arms 4 on PlayStation 2?
View Eurogamer readers most anticipated games

Thanks!

Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!

Comments: 1-50 of 57 in total | next 50 »

Poster
Comment Low-scoring comments hidden. Log in to see them!
Toothball
04/10/06 @ 12:01
#1
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Well I enjoyed it. Especially the way it let you turn off random battles. That part needs to be in more games.
Aretak
04/10/06 @ 12:04
#2
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I actually quite enjoyed Wild Arms 3. It's not exactly revolutionary stuff, but it's a good, solid JRPG with a lovely art style. This has been scoring quite well elsewhere, and the reviewer doesn't seem to like the franchise in general, so I think I'll take it all with a hefty pinch of salt.
abigsmurf
04/10/06 @ 12:05
#3
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Nice to know that the reviewer didn't go into this without some sort of negative bias...

I've no.4 isn't so hot but the comments on the Wild west theme getting diluted as the series goes on isn't really justified. Wild Arms 3 has extremely good wild west theming from the designs to the music to the general overall feel of it.
kissthestick
04/10/06 @ 12:15
#4
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
despite some hate i loved wild arms 3 *100hours i played* i' doubt i'll hate this one
toy_brain
04/10/06 @ 12:17
#5
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
OOohhh, sounds like somebody woke up on the wrong side of bed this morning. :P

(Though as I've yet to play WA4, I'm not in a position to dispute the final score)
itamae
04/10/06 @ 12:27
#6
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Wild Arms 3 was very mediocre and this doesn't sound any better. Think I'll pass.
lemonfist
04/10/06 @ 12:28
#7
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Wild Arms 3 is quite possibly the worst RPG I've played on the PS2.
Steroyd
04/10/06 @ 12:38
#8
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I'll second that me and my cousin were laughing our guts out when the game went into battle mode and all the characters where running around like confused stupid people.

Boy do i hate Wild Arms so much.
Blerk
04/10/06 @ 12:43
#9
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
A bit harsh on the Wild Arms series in general there, I think. The first game was good fun, and the last one was solid if unspectacular (and a bit over-long).

By the way, pretty serious mistake in the review there - the developer of the game is Media Vision, not XSEED. XSEED are the US publisher.
haowan
04/10/06 @ 12:48
#10
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Well-written review, very compelling reading. Lacks description of the game's audio, however.
Abscido
04/10/06 @ 12:50
#11
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Simon:

Apologies for jumping on your back regarding a review - I know how annoying that can be. I like to see a writer's personal opinion enter into a review; to some degree, that is the point of the exercise. However, your commentary on the Wild ARMs series came across as extremely ignorant. Not just in its use of language and tone, but from a purely critical perspective too - the series is laughably awful on many fronts (especially dialogue and characterisation) but there are reasons why it is so popular. As a reviewer, you should be aware of these, even if they don't appeal to you.

I haven't played Wild ARMs 4 yet, but the third game was one of my favourite RPGs on the PS2. When I reviewed WA3, however, I still gave it a 6. That's because, despite how much I enjoyed its strengths (exploration, puzzles, the music, wonderful controls, rewarding battle system), I couldn't overlook its downsides either, of which there are plenty.

I think my main problem with your review is that you blithely attack the rest of the Wild ARMs series as if you are quite familiar with it, but then fail to properly compare the latest iteration to its predecessors. If you are going to mention a game in the context of a series - and in such a strong manner - then I think proper comparisons between the relevant games is in order. Otherwise, I would just stick to reviewing the latest game in its own context (which, for the most part, you did).

Anyway, again, apologies for the criticism ... I rarely do this, but I felt a bit annoyed with the review! Hope you understand where I'm coming from.
Blerk
04/10/06 @ 12:52
#12
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
The reviewers are fighting! Fight! Fight!

:-D
toy_brain
04/10/06 @ 13:05
#13
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
WA3 had its own charm, mostly in the puzzle-filled dungeons and the styalised cell-shading, but it also had a bunch of really stupid flaws and yes, the battles did look really goofy with characters running around for no reason whatsoever.

I cant really decide if I liked that game or not. I liked the style and most of the characters, the script was typical JRPG stuff, the puzzles were kinda cool as was the way your 4 characters gained more puzzle-solving items as the game went on, but the radar system was dumb, the encounter rate a tad too high, and I probably would never have finished the game without the help of gamefaqs (thanks to a very annoying item-search quent near to the end).

Meh, I'll be going for Steambot Chronicles instead I think....
Edited 1 times, most recently on 04/10/06 @ 14:08
kissthestick
04/10/06 @ 13:15
#14
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
i demand a re-review! :)
gaijin
04/10/06 @ 13:31
#15
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
can something be 'remarkable' yet 'far from interesting'?

/crawls back under stone
Normski
04/10/06 @ 13:41
#16
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"Well I enjoyed it. Especially the way it let you turn off random battles. That part needs to be in more games."

I'm not sure the ability to turn bad things off is a valid selling point ;)
Abscido
04/10/06 @ 14:04
#17
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"The reviewers are fighting! Fight! Fight!

:-D"

I think I may have broken some sort of unspoken code here. I expect C.R.I.T.I.C (Clandestine Reviewers Institute for Terrorising Insolent Critics) to arrive at my door any second.

/gulps
goz
04/10/06 @ 14:04
#18
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Hi Abscido!

"Your commentary on the Wild ARMs series came across as extremely ignorant. Not just in its use of language and tone, but from a purely critical perspective too - the series is laughably awful on many fronts (especially dialogue and characterisation)..."

My language and tone wasn't ignorant - it was plain and strong. Indeed, I never called the Wild Arms series "awful" like you yourself do here. Rather, I called it bland, average and unremarkable - characteristics that seem to have been exacerbated as the series has progressed, evidence measured in this game by the rest of the review.

"but there are reasons why it is so popular. As a reviewer, you should be aware of these, even if they don't appeal to you."

There seems to be a concensus amongst my RPG playing friends that the high sales figures of the series are due to canny scheduling rather than any particular intrinsic worth - certainly at a critical level the series seems to have been judged consistently average - not badly - just averagely.

"When I reviewed WA3, however, I still gave it a 6. That's because I couldn't overlook its downsides either, of which there are plenty."

Neither could I.

"I would just stick to reviewing the latest game in its own context (which, for the most part, you did)."

For the most part, I think I did that.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 04/10/06 @ 15:06
Blerk
04/10/06 @ 14:17
#19
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Round 2... fight!
Abscido
04/10/06 @ 14:19
#20
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Heya Simon,

Good on you for replying. I certainly don't want to get into a 'quote fight' with you, but I believe "embarrassing aping of Final Fantasy" is more than just plain, while "viewed blindly, which is presumably how the swathes of fans that have promoted the brand to multi-million-seller look upon it" *does* verge on ignorant. You seem to be calling fans of the series 'blind' for not seeing, as we must presume you do, the series for what it is.

As for my "time-rich teenage years", I can assure you *I'm* not a teenager and quite enjoy the Wild ARMs series.

"There seems to be a concensus amongst my RPG playing friends that the high sales figures of the series are due to canny scheduling rather than any particular intly average and unremarkable."

Well, each to his own, but I think popularity should be criticised on the basis of gameplay, and not my friends' analysis of the marketing industry.

Anyway, I usually enjoy your reviews, but I'm (clearly! :-) ) a fan of the series, so I felt like defending it somewhat!
goz
04/10/06 @ 14:23
#21
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Fair enough - those two phrases you pick out were perhaps a bit antagonistic (nevertheless I do believe them).

And thanks for the compliment.
Blerk
04/10/06 @ 14:25
#22
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Group hug, guys! Group hug!

So... when are you going to fix the XSEED mistake, then? :-D
Zuiyo
04/10/06 @ 16:51
#23
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Abscido set the record straight. And Simon did accept the correction attempting not to lose face, by using more of that "plain and strong" style. When you write a review being guilty of the sins a fellow reviewer points out, and reply to his "heads up" call, the only way to run is forward.

However, a review is an opinion, and Eurogamer is Eurogamer. It is what it is, and it could be better, no question. "Sorry Simon, but it's your turn to review an obscure JPRG. We can't give 'em all to Rob - he's way too busy with our 'sister site'..."
Daryoon
04/10/06 @ 17:43
#24
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Wild Arms 3 is quite possibly the best RPG I've played on the PS2.
Scimarad
04/10/06 @ 18:29
#25
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Okay, for the first time ever I think EG have gone absolutely round the bend!! And they gave Enchanted Arms a 7???

Deranged, utterly deranged!

For people who actually do have some taste in RPGs WA4 is actually refreshing change for the series and I for one actually enjoyed it quite a bit. And yes I do play an awful lot of JRPGs...

/fumes

Edited 1 times, most recently on 04/10/06 @ 19:34
harts
04/10/06 @ 18:30
#26
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Not often I've seen so much hate for a game series as in the first three paragraphs of this review, I'm surprised it got as much as a 4.
BTW, accusing a random JRPG of "embarrassing aping" of Final Fantasy is just plain lazy journalism.
Scimarad
04/10/06 @ 18:44
#27
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Is there an 'Ignore Reviewer' button?

kissthestick
05/10/06 @ 03:17
#28
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
they gave enchanted arms a 7?



lmfao...
pancho
05/10/06 @ 07:10
#29
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
er...looking at Metacritic, Wild Arms 4 got a 3/10 from the Official US PS2 mag who said: "Having long since outlived its usefulness, the Wild Arms series has gone, with this entry, from merely banal to actively irritating. With such a wealth of RPGs getting translated nowadays and more companies than ever eager to get into the act, it's about time this appendix was removed."

Eurogamer are hardly alone in panning this game.
Scimarad
05/10/06 @ 07:53
#30
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Slagging of WA4 by criticizing WA in general just goes to show how little notice some people pay to the games they are reviewing.

Regardless of your opinion of Wild Arms, WA4 is nothing like a typical WA game; The battle system is totally different, the skill system is totally new, the environments are now done in an FFX/Xenosaga style & the 'dungeons' feature extensive platform elements (which worked very well).

The music was very different in style with Michiko Naruke only doing a few pieces here and there which, IMHO, created an extremely varied and truly excellent soundtrack. Unfortunately from a point of story and characters WA4 was a huge cliche-fest (especially towards the end) but since when has that stopped anyone enjoying an RPG? If I have any problem with WA4 it would be the removal of the 'tools' from the previous games...

I'd probably rate WA4 at about 7 though I'm tempted to knock a point off for the excrutiatingly awful english vocals on the theme tune:-(

I don't often get annoyed about reviews but this one is just infuriating - It's clearly in IGN territory...
Edited 1 times, most recently on 05/10/06 @ 08:54
Blerk
05/10/06 @ 08:12
#31
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Gosh! Quite a kick-back on this one! :-)
Scimarad
05/10/06 @ 08:23
#32
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Normally I'd apologize and say I'm being oversensitive but I mean it this time:-)

Decoded
05/10/06 @ 08:29
#33
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Well I enjoyed it. Especially the way it let you turn off random battles. That part needs to be in more games.

Can anyone elaborate on this? Is the option to switch off random battles available from the outset and without restrictions?

Might pick this one up, but not for £25. Didn't get along with WA3 at all.

Blerk
05/10/06 @ 08:43
#34
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I've seen it for £22 somewhere, if £3 makes a difference? :-)
Decoded
05/10/06 @ 08:47
#35
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Nahhh. This is sub-£18 fodder as far as I'm concerned. If only it had been released at a £25 pricepoint instead of £30.

All ten copies in the UK will probably disappear before any online retailer slashes the price :|
Cappy
05/10/06 @ 08:53
#36
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
You can import it for peanuts. Even with shipping a new copy worked out costing me less than £15.

I bet its even cheaper now.
Decoded
05/10/06 @ 09:39
#37
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
To be honest, I'm only interested in buying the game because of the European release. It's one of the few that I haven't imported and is an opportunity to show a little support for 505 (as I did with Stella Deus). But they should have followed Konami's lead and released this niché JRPG at a £25 price point.
Toothball
05/10/06 @ 10:39
#38
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Decoded: I probably made the random battle option sound a little better than it is. You can press the R2 button to switch random battles on and off in any given area if you've met certain conditions. This usually involves getting to a save point halfway through, and either fighting some enemies or solving a puzzle. Fortunately, the time it took to get to these points was about the same time it took me to get bored of random battles. This also meant I got into just about enough fights to keep the characters levelled up. Lucky cards and boss fights left took care of the rest.

Most of the areas where you have to do a load of running and jumping have no battles at all, which helps a lot.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 05/10/06 @ 11:40
Abscido
05/10/06 @ 17:04
#39
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Edit: Irrelevant now.
Edited 2 times, most recently on 05/10/06 @ 18:38
Abscido
05/10/06 @ 17:36
#40
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"Anyway, I view that sort of open, public criticism as being unprofessional when it's done at somewhere you've worked before."

To be honest, I feel quite bad about it now, and I think you're right in saying the above. But I'm passionate about games first and foremost, and my own interests second, if you can believe that. I probably should have used a different log-in though.
kentmonkey
05/10/06 @ 18:35
#41
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
SecondMiltia.com I don't get why Abscido shouldn't be able to express "an honest opinion" on a game either, as by your own definition he is also a reviewer.

If more reviewers on here, and on other sites and printed press as well, challenged each other more often, we might end up with better written reviews and more consistency across the board. Some people, on here and everywhere, get complacent and pump out crap from time to time, others do it on an almost consistent basis and yet still get asked to come back and write more, and it galls me when other co-workers blindly stick up for others when in some cases, they've also got to think it's the biggest pile of tosh they've ever read.

And "I can understand if you say "well you didn't mention this or this", but just disagreeing with a score is ridiculous and a complete waste of everyone's time. Your opinion differs. So fucking what? "

Have you read the posts above? Most state that they would give it a 6 at best and tend to agree that it's not the best the world has ever seen and generally aren't complaining about the score, they're actually saying that they thought the review was badly written, contained errors and was presented in a biased way. I don't have an opinion as I have never played a Wild Arms game but all I can say is it wasn't the most informative or well written review I've ever read either.

Statements like yours always make me laugh as the irony of it is, if someone thinks it's a good idea to stand up for a game they love, and you think they shouldn't complain, then your opinion differs to theirs. So...err..."your opinion differs, so fucking what" applies I suppose. ;P
Edited 1 times, most recently on 05/10/06 @ 19:46
Scimarad
05/10/06 @ 18:44
#42
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Couldn't agree more - I don't have anything against the reviewer, just the review. If I overstated the point I apologize, I was just a bit incredulous:-)

I've had a think about it and still say it's a worthwhile, enjoyable game despite deficiencies in the story department and 2 of the most cliched characters ever....
kentmonkey
05/10/06 @ 21:25
#43
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Right first secondmiltia.com, you're objecting to other peoples views and comments so again "your opinion differs, so fucking what" applies. Two out of those three you quoted weren't even mentioning the score. One was laughing at the fact they gave another game a 7, not comparing it to this game whatsoever. The other was merely saying that they enjoyed the game and didn't mention the score again whatsoever.

Right second secondmiltia.com, you have a very aggressive and personal attacking attitiude, for someone who doesn't seem to like personal attackson people.

Right third secondmiltia.com...ah who am I kidding, I really couldn't give a shit.

You're aggressive, seem to have posted just to start an argument and whilst their isn't an "ignore reviewer button" (which is just such an awful personal insult by the way scimarad that I think you should go and hang yourself from your balls for the next week) but there is an ignore poster button which I intend to use.

And please, it's not because you have a different opinion to me, it's because personally I can't see your posting style changing and we could well do without one other aggressive argumentative noob joining seeming to have a hard-on for confrontration.

Peace out.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 05/10/06 @ 22:29
Scimarad
05/10/06 @ 22:03
#44
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I believe you either missed my "If I overstated the point I apologize" or chose to ignore it. I'm pretty sure I know which...

As to the "you're wrong if your opinion differs"; Huh? I disagree so of course I think they are wrong! That's the whole point of disagreeing isn't it? I'm not saying they aren't entitled to hold a different opinion or anything. Also I just read the review was posting my immediate emotional response - Is that a sin or is it now necessary to sit back and have a good hard think before posting on one of these threads?

As to my 'ignore reviewer' comment - That was just another example of me being a bit incredulous at the time. But if I am being honest I am less likely to trust this reviewers opinion in future because A:their taste in games obviously differs greatly from my own and B:the review was uniformative, somewhat biased (IMO) and therefore a not an effective review.

Seriously, I'm sure Simon doesn't require you to go around protecting him everytime someone disagrees with him or criticizes one of his reviews.
Edited 3 times, most recently on 05/10/06 @ 23:15
Decoded
06/10/06 @ 06:42
#45
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Some of the criticism has been a little harsh.

Simon cited numerous examples of why he disliked Wild Arms 4. Yes, he did make it clear that he's not a fan of previous games in the franchise, but, for me, he gave sufficent reasons why he didn't think much of this game, justifying the tone and final score of the review.

Toothball: Thanks for the explanation. It strikes me as odd that they would revamp the battle system while leaving poxy random battles in place. But I really don't want to open that can of worms again...
Scimarad
06/10/06 @ 08:18
#46
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"but, for me, he gave sufficent reasons why he didn't think much of this game, justifying the tone and final score of the review."

Let's just say I'd like to see what he would make of a number of other JRPGs as most of his criticisms could easily be levelled at them if one were so inclined. If he hates the battle system in WA4 so much I would love to see what he would make of the one in Enchanted Arms.

He says "The hotchpotch of ill-explored plot-ideas - each stolen from other myths and games - forms a most uneven and ill-fitting tapestry"; Why is this leveled specifically at this game? Surely that could be aimed at pretty much any JRPG! If he is attacking the conventions of JRPGs in general than he should say so rather than taking a pop at a game which is moving on from the previous games in the series.

On the platforming elements - "But the implementation of the idea is shoddy and bespeaks a developer trying moves outside of its limited repertoire " - Compared to what? It works a bloody site better than in Xenogears for example. It's far from shoddy - if he'd said "it doesn't really add anything" he'd be on firmer territory, though I did enjoy those sections.

"implies that you don't think Simon puts effort into his work."

Actually I was implying that he seems to have put most of his effort into ridiculing the game rather than reviewing it, especially considering he made it extremely clear about his opinions on the series in general from the start. I would be much more inclined to accept the review if every line wasn't oozing with bile...

I think a slightly above average game has been represented as an absolutely dire one and if people want to take offense at me for saying that then there is always the 'Ignore' button. It seems that main reason that Simon dislikes the game (and the series) is that it 'lacks ambition' to be a true gaming classic rather than just an enjoyable way to spend a few hours - How many other games could you aim THAT at?

Anyway, that's all I'm going to say on the subject!
Edited 1 times, most recently on 06/10/06 @ 09:19
Toothball
06/10/06 @ 08:31
#47
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Decoded: I suppose it it a little odd that random battles are still there. They changed a lot of things with this game. You don't spend your time travelling from A to B on a world map, instead you wander through a selection of areas in between. The characters talk about things along the way, so it feels a little more like you're actually travelling somewhere.
goz
06/10/06 @ 08:42
#48
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Scimarad: just a quick note to say that in the last 12 months I've reviewed 23 JRPGs for Eurogamer so you can easily read my views on all the others, and why I think WA4 is wholly average compared to them.

I don't think my criticisms of this game are criticisms of the genre at large - although many are symptomatic of an unwillingness of some developers to innovate in the JRPG. Thankfully a large number of JRPGs in the last 12 months have been brilliantly executed, tried new things, told interesting stories in interesting ways and featured compulsive, entertaining gameplay. I believe WIld Arms 4 is objectively cliched or average in all these areas and, as decoded says, I think I gave numerous clear reasons why this is the case. I'm sorry you disagreed, but at least you cared.
toy_brain
06/10/06 @ 15:40
#49
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I think I'm gonna pick this game up after all.
If nothing else, those that like it seem to do so quite passionately. To me that implies a decent game whose 'flaws' can be seen as 'quirks' if you are liking the overall experience.

Pluss the stuff about the random battles seems very much up my street.
Scimarad
06/10/06 @ 18:23
#50
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Fair enough, it's a good reply and now I feel slightly ashamed for slagging off your review:-)

Comments: 1-50 of 57 in total | next 50 »

Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!

Get Games.  Download Great PC Games!

X View gallery