SevenForce
Tri Force Heroes is a good game, but you absolutely need two other people to experience the game properly. Single player won't cut it for this one. They shouldn't have given the option for single player given that's why people seem to hate the game.
It's a multiplayer Zelda game built off of A Link Between Worlds. What I really liked about this one is that players will get different dungeon items from each other, meaning that they have to play different roles during the mission. For example: one player will get a water rod that allows the other players to reach higher elevations, while another player will get a boomerang that can move other players across gaps. The people you're playing with really rely on you for your role, which means teamwork is crucial. Players have to work together to defeat bosses and solve puzzles. In my opinion that's a lot more interesting than just letting one player do all the work. I don't play that many multiplayer games but I find this sort of co-op where each team member is necessary for success to be very enjoyable. In some games co-op multiplayer can feel like you're just playing single player with another person onscreen. Tri Force Heroes shows the value of multiplayer games that are actually designed around communicating and cooperating with your team members. But that also means you have to find people willing to cooperate in order to beat a full multiplayer Zelda game together and that's easier said than done.
Most people don't want to play a multiplayer Zelda game, but I'm here to tell you that you should. Tri Force Heroes is super underrated and a lot more fun than some of the single player games like Phantom Hourglass or Spirit Tracks. It's just as worth playing through as the mainline games, but unfortunately you may never get the chance to play it. So here's hoping Nintendo ports this game and the Four Swords games to their newest platform to show fans that multiplayer Zelda is actually good.
It's a multiplayer Zelda game built off of A Link Between Worlds. What I really liked about this one is that players will get different dungeon items from each other, meaning that they have to play different roles during the mission. For example: one player will get a water rod that allows the other players to reach higher elevations, while another player will get a boomerang that can move other players across gaps. The people you're playing with really rely on you for your role, which means teamwork is crucial. Players have to work together to defeat bosses and solve puzzles. In my opinion that's a lot more interesting than just letting one player do all the work. I don't play that many multiplayer games but I find this sort of co-op where each team member is necessary for success to be very enjoyable. In some games co-op multiplayer can feel like you're just playing single player with another person onscreen. Tri Force Heroes shows the value of multiplayer games that are actually designed around communicating and cooperating with your team members. But that also means you have to find people willing to cooperate in order to beat a full multiplayer Zelda game together and that's easier said than done.
Most people don't want to play a multiplayer Zelda game, but I'm here to tell you that you should. Tri Force Heroes is super underrated and a lot more fun than some of the single player games like Phantom Hourglass or Spirit Tracks. It's just as worth playing through as the mainline games, but unfortunately you may never get the chance to play it. So here's hoping Nintendo ports this game and the Four Swords games to their newest platform to show fans that multiplayer Zelda is actually good.
I was so close to thinking this game was great but it fell off harder than anything else I've played during the second half. The ENTIRE second half of the game is just padding. You backtrack through all the game's levels until you reach the starting point, fighting the same bosses along the way. That's it. You don't even get a unique final level. Instead, you have to do a boss gauntlet where you fight each boss for a THIRD time. There is a unique climactic fight before the gauntlet, but the final boss? Once again, it's just a slightly stronger version of a boss you've fought before. What a letdown.
I would have preferred if they just ended the game as the first half concludes. That would have made for a short-but-sweet experience. But the game continues while pretending that it still has some cards left to play, even though as a player you're hyper-aware that it has used up all of its tricks. I know they ran out of budget, but that's no excuse for padding the game out like this. Don't make budgetary issues into the player's problem. Just end the game if you have nothing left to show.
I would have preferred if they just ended the game as the first half concludes. That would have made for a short-but-sweet experience. But the game continues while pretending that it still has some cards left to play, even though as a player you're hyper-aware that it has used up all of its tricks. I know they ran out of budget, but that's no excuse for padding the game out like this. Don't make budgetary issues into the player's problem. Just end the game if you have nothing left to show.
Alright, Devil May Cry. You got me. I'm all in.
And here I was thinking this series wasn't for me because I didn't love Devil May Cry 1. As it turns out this is very much my kind of franchise, I just wasn't able to see it because I started with the wrong game. Devil May Cry 3 is a great prequel - so much so that it does a better job at setting up the origin mythos of this franchise than the original game does. Not only that, but it's a giant improvement over the first game in almost every possible way. So in my opinion DMC 3 makes for a better starting point than DMC 1.
The story of DMC 3 has a simple premise: stop Vergil from opening the portal to the demon world. It's not particularly complex storytelling, but where the story shines is the sibling rivalry between Dante and Vergil. This rival dynamic elevates the story in a significant way. I cared about the events of the story because I knew it was all leading to an epic showdown between these two brothers. It does end up happening in an unexpected way though.
[Skip this next paragraph if you don't want to be spoiled]
Dante and Vergil team up at the end to fight off a twist villain who's seemingly the final boss. This fight feels like conclusion to the story, but right afterward Dante and Vergil have the final confrontation with each other that the whole story was leading up to. I loved this because it took the story in an interesting new direction while also giving a satisfying conclusion to the initial premise. Speaking of satisfying conclusions, I really enjoyed Lady's story as well. She's on a quest to get revenge on her father, but in his final breath her father claims to have been controlled by Vergil. Lady confronts Vergil only to see the grand reveal that her father was still alive and in full control of himself the whole time. Her father becomes the twist villain and seemingly the final boss. When the father is defeated, Lady deals the final strike. I love how this story misdirects you into thinking that these characters won't get satisfying conclusions only to revert to the original course and give the story the resolution it was building toward from the beginning.
[End of Spoilers]
Let's talk about the combat. DMC includes a much larger array of weapons than DMC 1. This gives Dante plenty of creative freedom to handle different situations. During the course of the game I was able to find certain scenarios that favored each weapon I had. With all these weapons Dante's movepool is huge even under normal conditions. However, using the swordmaster style can expand the moveset even further, giving dante new moves for every weapon. I absolutely loved the expessiveness of DMC 3's combat that this giant movepool made possible. I was never bored by the combat or frustrated by losing to hard boss battles because I always felt like I could drastically change up my strategy and find new ways to enjoy the game. And this Switch exclusive version of DMC 3 allows for Style switching during combat, which expands Dante's moveset even further. Just like the weapons I was able to make great use of all the styles as well. All of this adds up to make DMC 3 one of the most fluid action combat systems I've ever seen.
My biggest critique with this game is that the camera isn't great. Don't get me wrong though, it's nowhere near DMC 1 levels of bad. There's still the occasional PS1 Resident Evil style camera in DMC 3 but it's usually reserved for non-combat sections. In DMC 1 the average combat arena would have the camera experimenting with "artistic" angles for every five steps you took, rendering the game extremely frustrating to play. DMC 3 has a free camera... in theory, anyway. It's extremely slow to control and it doesn't even work sometimes. Better to just rely on the auto camera which naturally turns to show the enemy you're fighting. ...Well...in theory. The camera has a mind of its own and frequently doesn't show the action you want to see. Locking on doesn't yield great results either. The camera doesn't snap to lock on targets like you would expect. Oh well. The camera may be bad, but on the bright side it doesn't ruin the game like the camera from DMC 1. We're making progress here.
Devil May Cry 3 is a fantastic game. I loved the whole experience from beginning to end. I am aware of some of the criticisms that DMC 1 fans have with it... But these don't bother me. Dante might not have the same personality he has in DMC 1 but he's a far more interesting and entertaining character here. Also I know there are people who prefer how the ranking system/harder difficulties were handled in DMC 1, but if I were to play that game at a high level then that game's flaws would become even more pronounced. DMC 3 is just a more enjoyable game in every possible way for me, so that would extend to higher difficulties as well.
If you're looking to start the Devil May Cry series then I recommend starting with Devil May Cry 3. It's easily one of the best games I've played all year, if not the best game flat out.
And here I was thinking this series wasn't for me because I didn't love Devil May Cry 1. As it turns out this is very much my kind of franchise, I just wasn't able to see it because I started with the wrong game. Devil May Cry 3 is a great prequel - so much so that it does a better job at setting up the origin mythos of this franchise than the original game does. Not only that, but it's a giant improvement over the first game in almost every possible way. So in my opinion DMC 3 makes for a better starting point than DMC 1.
The story of DMC 3 has a simple premise: stop Vergil from opening the portal to the demon world. It's not particularly complex storytelling, but where the story shines is the sibling rivalry between Dante and Vergil. This rival dynamic elevates the story in a significant way. I cared about the events of the story because I knew it was all leading to an epic showdown between these two brothers. It does end up happening in an unexpected way though.
[Skip this next paragraph if you don't want to be spoiled]
Dante and Vergil team up at the end to fight off a twist villain who's seemingly the final boss. This fight feels like conclusion to the story, but right afterward Dante and Vergil have the final confrontation with each other that the whole story was leading up to. I loved this because it took the story in an interesting new direction while also giving a satisfying conclusion to the initial premise. Speaking of satisfying conclusions, I really enjoyed Lady's story as well. She's on a quest to get revenge on her father, but in his final breath her father claims to have been controlled by Vergil. Lady confronts Vergil only to see the grand reveal that her father was still alive and in full control of himself the whole time. Her father becomes the twist villain and seemingly the final boss. When the father is defeated, Lady deals the final strike. I love how this story misdirects you into thinking that these characters won't get satisfying conclusions only to revert to the original course and give the story the resolution it was building toward from the beginning.
[End of Spoilers]
Let's talk about the combat. DMC includes a much larger array of weapons than DMC 1. This gives Dante plenty of creative freedom to handle different situations. During the course of the game I was able to find certain scenarios that favored each weapon I had. With all these weapons Dante's movepool is huge even under normal conditions. However, using the swordmaster style can expand the moveset even further, giving dante new moves for every weapon. I absolutely loved the expessiveness of DMC 3's combat that this giant movepool made possible. I was never bored by the combat or frustrated by losing to hard boss battles because I always felt like I could drastically change up my strategy and find new ways to enjoy the game. And this Switch exclusive version of DMC 3 allows for Style switching during combat, which expands Dante's moveset even further. Just like the weapons I was able to make great use of all the styles as well. All of this adds up to make DMC 3 one of the most fluid action combat systems I've ever seen.
My biggest critique with this game is that the camera isn't great. Don't get me wrong though, it's nowhere near DMC 1 levels of bad. There's still the occasional PS1 Resident Evil style camera in DMC 3 but it's usually reserved for non-combat sections. In DMC 1 the average combat arena would have the camera experimenting with "artistic" angles for every five steps you took, rendering the game extremely frustrating to play. DMC 3 has a free camera... in theory, anyway. It's extremely slow to control and it doesn't even work sometimes. Better to just rely on the auto camera which naturally turns to show the enemy you're fighting. ...Well...in theory. The camera has a mind of its own and frequently doesn't show the action you want to see. Locking on doesn't yield great results either. The camera doesn't snap to lock on targets like you would expect. Oh well. The camera may be bad, but on the bright side it doesn't ruin the game like the camera from DMC 1. We're making progress here.
Devil May Cry 3 is a fantastic game. I loved the whole experience from beginning to end. I am aware of some of the criticisms that DMC 1 fans have with it... But these don't bother me. Dante might not have the same personality he has in DMC 1 but he's a far more interesting and entertaining character here. Also I know there are people who prefer how the ranking system/harder difficulties were handled in DMC 1, but if I were to play that game at a high level then that game's flaws would become even more pronounced. DMC 3 is just a more enjoyable game in every possible way for me, so that would extend to higher difficulties as well.
If you're looking to start the Devil May Cry series then I recommend starting with Devil May Cry 3. It's easily one of the best games I've played all year, if not the best game flat out.
2006
Wii Sports is many things.
One of the most important games of all time.
A showcase of a revolutionary new way that games could be controlled.
A game that can be played with anyone regardless of their familiarity with or affinity for videogames.
And a bit of a barebones pack-in game if we're being honest.
But putting that aside, I think you really do have to give it credit for being one of the only video games to ever have entire non-gaming families playing together all across the world. It's the ultimate casual game and it's worth noting over something like Wii Sports Resort because it represents the motion control fad at its peak.
That's right, motion control was a fad. Or was it? It's hard to tell, but we did learn one thing from the Wii era and that's the fact that many hardcore gamers don't like getting up from the couch and moving their arms to play games. It's true that those people would never use motion as their main method of control. However, I think others had the potential to be convinced, but were ultimately unimpressed by motion control as a concept. We might have to blame Nintendo for that.
Nintendo popularized motion control without showing the potential. They didn't include gyroscopes in the initial Wii remotes, making for an extremely limited execution of the motion control concept. Wii Sports was a worse game for not having compatibility with a Wii Motion Plus gyroscope. This is clear once you see the giant increase in quality with the motion control in games like Red Steel 2 and Wii Sports Resort. Maybe motion control would still be a popular method of play if the original Wii Sports had Wii Motion Plus support.
But then again, maybe motion control would have fizzed out eventually anyway. It's impossible to know. But given the fact that Wii Sports was many people's first and/or only experience with the Wii, I think we can both thank Wii Sports for popularizing motion control as well as blame it for relegating that control method to only be used with VR, Nintendo consoles, and gyro aiming for the forseeable future.
We are never getting Red Steel 3.
One of the most important games of all time.
A showcase of a revolutionary new way that games could be controlled.
A game that can be played with anyone regardless of their familiarity with or affinity for videogames.
And a bit of a barebones pack-in game if we're being honest.
But putting that aside, I think you really do have to give it credit for being one of the only video games to ever have entire non-gaming families playing together all across the world. It's the ultimate casual game and it's worth noting over something like Wii Sports Resort because it represents the motion control fad at its peak.
That's right, motion control was a fad. Or was it? It's hard to tell, but we did learn one thing from the Wii era and that's the fact that many hardcore gamers don't like getting up from the couch and moving their arms to play games. It's true that those people would never use motion as their main method of control. However, I think others had the potential to be convinced, but were ultimately unimpressed by motion control as a concept. We might have to blame Nintendo for that.
Nintendo popularized motion control without showing the potential. They didn't include gyroscopes in the initial Wii remotes, making for an extremely limited execution of the motion control concept. Wii Sports was a worse game for not having compatibility with a Wii Motion Plus gyroscope. This is clear once you see the giant increase in quality with the motion control in games like Red Steel 2 and Wii Sports Resort. Maybe motion control would still be a popular method of play if the original Wii Sports had Wii Motion Plus support.
But then again, maybe motion control would have fizzed out eventually anyway. It's impossible to know. But given the fact that Wii Sports was many people's first and/or only experience with the Wii, I think we can both thank Wii Sports for popularizing motion control as well as blame it for relegating that control method to only be used with VR, Nintendo consoles, and gyro aiming for the forseeable future.
We are never getting Red Steel 3.
2001
Man am I glad to be done with this one. This game has been a barrier to getting into the Devil May Cry series for me because it's hard to get myself to play games that I don't really like. I could have skipped over DMC 1 but the fans kept saying that this one is worth playing - with some fans even saying that it's the purest form of Devil May Cry and future entries water things down. The idea of anyone being elitist over this game is ridiculous to me. I suppose if the motto of JRPG fans is "It gets good after 80 hours" then the motto of character action game fans is "It gets good after you go for a perfect ranking on the hardest difficulty". Yeah, I'm not doing that. I'd rather invest my time in an action game that isn't randomly flipping the camera all over the place with no regard for the player.
The camera ruins the game for me. In a game that's supposed to be hard but fair, the camera does everything in its power to make sure the player experiences plenty of cheap deaths. It should be obvious, but a resident evil style camera doesn't work for a game that's very fast paced, relies on a quick succession of inputs, and allows the protagonist to perform different moves depending on the direction he's facing. A random camera shift could happen at any moment that changes what your inputs do, resulting in a loss of player control. Once again I have to ask why there are any hardcore fans that prefer this game when the constantly shifting camera limits the degree that you can be in control of your own moveset. I know people prefer Kamiya directed games because of their focus on the ranking system but this easily one of Kamiya's worst games. It has a solid combat system for the time and you can really see the aspects that make it a Kamiya game... But it's just needlessly frustrating due to the camera.
Devil May Cry can feel like a boss rush at times and while there are a number of challenging encounters, most of them you have to fight 2-3 times with little variation in their movesets. I can see that Devil May Cry wants to be the game that's constantly throwing challenging fights at the player, but this isn't as impactful when it's the just the same fight in the same way repeatedly. The final boss encounter was also underwhelming. There's a shmup section for the first phase, which is fine. It is a Kamiya game after all. But the second phase which is fought on land is also just a battle of projectiles, which seems like a ill-fitting way to round out the experience. It's not an outlandish idea to suggest the final boss should have used the melee mechanics which you've been using the entire game.
For the origin of the acclaimed Devil May Cry series I was pretty surprised to see how weak the story is. I enjoyed the character Dante more from cultural osmosis, memes, and SMT Nocturne than I did in his own game. His personality is far less confident and quippy than the internet would have you believe. I've heard from purists that the games after DMC 1 ruin Dante's personality... bro, what personality? When people compared original RE4 Leon to Dante I was expecting him to be similarly badass... But it turns out Leon makes a better Dante than Dante himself. I never once bought into Trish and Dante's character relationship. The game expects you believe that these two care for each other but they've only spoken to each other a handful of times... And one of those times was Trish betraying Dante.
I respect and appreciate what this game accomplished by inventing the character-action game genre. But as a game I didn't enjoy it very much. This is the only DMC game I've played so I can't speak for the series, but I'm already seriously doubting the purists who say that this one's the best.
The camera ruins the game for me. In a game that's supposed to be hard but fair, the camera does everything in its power to make sure the player experiences plenty of cheap deaths. It should be obvious, but a resident evil style camera doesn't work for a game that's very fast paced, relies on a quick succession of inputs, and allows the protagonist to perform different moves depending on the direction he's facing. A random camera shift could happen at any moment that changes what your inputs do, resulting in a loss of player control. Once again I have to ask why there are any hardcore fans that prefer this game when the constantly shifting camera limits the degree that you can be in control of your own moveset. I know people prefer Kamiya directed games because of their focus on the ranking system but this easily one of Kamiya's worst games. It has a solid combat system for the time and you can really see the aspects that make it a Kamiya game... But it's just needlessly frustrating due to the camera.
Devil May Cry can feel like a boss rush at times and while there are a number of challenging encounters, most of them you have to fight 2-3 times with little variation in their movesets. I can see that Devil May Cry wants to be the game that's constantly throwing challenging fights at the player, but this isn't as impactful when it's the just the same fight in the same way repeatedly. The final boss encounter was also underwhelming. There's a shmup section for the first phase, which is fine. It is a Kamiya game after all. But the second phase which is fought on land is also just a battle of projectiles, which seems like a ill-fitting way to round out the experience. It's not an outlandish idea to suggest the final boss should have used the melee mechanics which you've been using the entire game.
For the origin of the acclaimed Devil May Cry series I was pretty surprised to see how weak the story is. I enjoyed the character Dante more from cultural osmosis, memes, and SMT Nocturne than I did in his own game. His personality is far less confident and quippy than the internet would have you believe. I've heard from purists that the games after DMC 1 ruin Dante's personality... bro, what personality? When people compared original RE4 Leon to Dante I was expecting him to be similarly badass... But it turns out Leon makes a better Dante than Dante himself. I never once bought into Trish and Dante's character relationship. The game expects you believe that these two care for each other but they've only spoken to each other a handful of times... And one of those times was Trish betraying Dante.
I respect and appreciate what this game accomplished by inventing the character-action game genre. But as a game I didn't enjoy it very much. This is the only DMC game I've played so I can't speak for the series, but I'm already seriously doubting the purists who say that this one's the best.
When I heard that Trails of Cold Steel had the weakest reception for a Trails game I was curious as to why that is. It's the first game in the Trails series that reaches AA level in terms of production quality, so you might assume that the overall experience would be better as a result. Other people probably assumed the same, as apparently it's popular to skip over the Trails in the Sky games and the Crossbell duology in favor of starting with this game.
After playing Trails of Cold Steel myself, I think the upgrade from a small-scale series to AA levels of production quality drew in a lot of unfavorable comparisons to contemporary games. Instead of being impressive for a small series, Trails is now underwhelming for AA standards. Trails of Cold Steel is a bit ugly. There's pop-in, ugly textures, way too many low-poly objects, stiff animations, and it all unfortunately gives off the appearance of a cheap looking game. And personally, I think the new presentation loses a bit of the charm of the older games. Trails of Cold Steel uses 3D character models instead of character portrait artwork to accompany its dialogue. The faces of the character models are way less expressive than the character portraits, so it sometimes feels like this game has less of a personality than the older ones. Speaking of lost personality, the treasure chests no longer talk to you when you check them twice. I'm aware that's something that was only in the English translations of the older games, but it was one of my favorite things about those games so it's unfortunate that it's not here.
The presentation is one thing, but I think the big reason why this game has a mixed reception from fans is its story. After Trails to Azure we've now reverted to a Trails in the Sky style setup game where very little happens for the majority of the story's duration. But where Cold Steel differs from Trails in the Sky First Chapter is that FC managed to have a self contained conflict that was resolved by the end of the game. The late stages of Trails in the Sky are about stopping a military coup. The late stages of Trails of Cold Steel are about putting on a school festival - with some random ass-pull final dungeon and final boss in the mix that come out of nowhere and don't push the story forward much. The climax of Trails of Cold Steel actually happens after the final boss... but there's no real additional final boss, just a series of gimmick fights before the game ends and tells you to play Trails of Cold Steel II. Don't get me wrong, the ending was actually my favorite part of the game, but I can't say this trend of making an uneventful 80 hour RPG where the ending is the only time something significant happens is something I'm very fond of. But I will say the ending definitely saved the game for me.
Trails of Cold Steel feels a bit like a Persona game, as it takes place at a military academy. There are school life segments in addition to the field studies which advance the main story. This is fine as a setup, but what I think Trails of Cold Steel gets wrong about this formula is that there's no sense of looming danger while the school life segments are going on. In the Persona games there's always a countdown until something bad happens while the school life segments are ongoing. In Trails of Cold Steel there's no danger during these parts so it just ends up feeling like a life-sim cozy game that drags the pacing of the story down. This is still the case even though the life sim elements of Trails of Cold Steel go by fairly quickly. Contextualizing the gameplay loop back into the main story is important. Also I just have to say... At this point in the Trails series I am really starting to get sick of all the busywork sidequests that are required to advance the story. It looks like the sidequest doors of Trails in the Sky the 3rd will remain unmatched.
If the purpose of this first Trails of Cold Steel game was to get the player to like the main cast, then they did a passable job. I liked how certain characters were antagonistic toward each other but became better friends due to the events of the story. But I will say that for all that effort in trying to make the characters likable, there are a number of characters that I straight up dislike. As far as first games go, it seems like Trails From Zero accomplished a lot more with its characters without any life sim elements and without a plot with the pacing of molasses. Also, because of certain characters, Trails of Cold Steel is the most cringeworthy game I've played since Xenoblade 2.
It might just be stockholm syndrome as a result of trying to play all the Trails games in sequence but I actually enjoy the combat of this game a fair bit. It's the same combat as in the previous games but the addition of link attacks is pretty fun. Combat is where the the upgrade in production values really shines. Having full character models instead of chibi sprites allows for attacks to have more impact with the increased animation quality. However, I'm not a fan of the changes to the orbment system. In previous games maximizing your orbments to get the best possible arts felt like a satisfying puzzle, but in Trails of Cold Steel the system has been dumbed down to just allow you to choose what arts you want directly. Lame.
My favorite thing about this game aside from the combat system is the music. Is it a hot take to say that Trails of Cold Steel has one of the best selections of music in the series? Every battle theme is good - even the normal battle theme, which is something I can't say about some of the other Trails games. It's my favorite normal battle theme in the series because it actually pumps you up for battle. And you can definitely tell that the sound team has gotten a lot better with JRPG town and field music since Trails in the Sky FC. I think Cold Steel I and Trails in the Sky the 3rd are my picks for best overall soundtrack so far. But I'll have to give them all another listen to be sure.
I don't hate this game. But there are a good amount of things that I don't like about it. I'd be a lot more negative if the game just ended after the final boss without the events that take place afterward. I think this could be the start of a good story arc but I'm a little concerned that the other Trails of Cold Steel games seem to have somewhat lower reception from fans as well. But one thing is for sure: don't start the Trails franchise with game. Not only does it spoil the events of Trails to Azure, but the slow pacing and uneventful story might be enough to make you disinterested in the franchise.
After playing Trails of Cold Steel myself, I think the upgrade from a small-scale series to AA levels of production quality drew in a lot of unfavorable comparisons to contemporary games. Instead of being impressive for a small series, Trails is now underwhelming for AA standards. Trails of Cold Steel is a bit ugly. There's pop-in, ugly textures, way too many low-poly objects, stiff animations, and it all unfortunately gives off the appearance of a cheap looking game. And personally, I think the new presentation loses a bit of the charm of the older games. Trails of Cold Steel uses 3D character models instead of character portrait artwork to accompany its dialogue. The faces of the character models are way less expressive than the character portraits, so it sometimes feels like this game has less of a personality than the older ones. Speaking of lost personality, the treasure chests no longer talk to you when you check them twice. I'm aware that's something that was only in the English translations of the older games, but it was one of my favorite things about those games so it's unfortunate that it's not here.
The presentation is one thing, but I think the big reason why this game has a mixed reception from fans is its story. After Trails to Azure we've now reverted to a Trails in the Sky style setup game where very little happens for the majority of the story's duration. But where Cold Steel differs from Trails in the Sky First Chapter is that FC managed to have a self contained conflict that was resolved by the end of the game. The late stages of Trails in the Sky are about stopping a military coup. The late stages of Trails of Cold Steel are about putting on a school festival - with some random ass-pull final dungeon and final boss in the mix that come out of nowhere and don't push the story forward much. The climax of Trails of Cold Steel actually happens after the final boss... but there's no real additional final boss, just a series of gimmick fights before the game ends and tells you to play Trails of Cold Steel II. Don't get me wrong, the ending was actually my favorite part of the game, but I can't say this trend of making an uneventful 80 hour RPG where the ending is the only time something significant happens is something I'm very fond of. But I will say the ending definitely saved the game for me.
Trails of Cold Steel feels a bit like a Persona game, as it takes place at a military academy. There are school life segments in addition to the field studies which advance the main story. This is fine as a setup, but what I think Trails of Cold Steel gets wrong about this formula is that there's no sense of looming danger while the school life segments are going on. In the Persona games there's always a countdown until something bad happens while the school life segments are ongoing. In Trails of Cold Steel there's no danger during these parts so it just ends up feeling like a life-sim cozy game that drags the pacing of the story down. This is still the case even though the life sim elements of Trails of Cold Steel go by fairly quickly. Contextualizing the gameplay loop back into the main story is important. Also I just have to say... At this point in the Trails series I am really starting to get sick of all the busywork sidequests that are required to advance the story. It looks like the sidequest doors of Trails in the Sky the 3rd will remain unmatched.
If the purpose of this first Trails of Cold Steel game was to get the player to like the main cast, then they did a passable job. I liked how certain characters were antagonistic toward each other but became better friends due to the events of the story. But I will say that for all that effort in trying to make the characters likable, there are a number of characters that I straight up dislike. As far as first games go, it seems like Trails From Zero accomplished a lot more with its characters without any life sim elements and without a plot with the pacing of molasses. Also, because of certain characters, Trails of Cold Steel is the most cringeworthy game I've played since Xenoblade 2.
It might just be stockholm syndrome as a result of trying to play all the Trails games in sequence but I actually enjoy the combat of this game a fair bit. It's the same combat as in the previous games but the addition of link attacks is pretty fun. Combat is where the the upgrade in production values really shines. Having full character models instead of chibi sprites allows for attacks to have more impact with the increased animation quality. However, I'm not a fan of the changes to the orbment system. In previous games maximizing your orbments to get the best possible arts felt like a satisfying puzzle, but in Trails of Cold Steel the system has been dumbed down to just allow you to choose what arts you want directly. Lame.
My favorite thing about this game aside from the combat system is the music. Is it a hot take to say that Trails of Cold Steel has one of the best selections of music in the series? Every battle theme is good - even the normal battle theme, which is something I can't say about some of the other Trails games. It's my favorite normal battle theme in the series because it actually pumps you up for battle. And you can definitely tell that the sound team has gotten a lot better with JRPG town and field music since Trails in the Sky FC. I think Cold Steel I and Trails in the Sky the 3rd are my picks for best overall soundtrack so far. But I'll have to give them all another listen to be sure.
I don't hate this game. But there are a good amount of things that I don't like about it. I'd be a lot more negative if the game just ended after the final boss without the events that take place afterward. I think this could be the start of a good story arc but I'm a little concerned that the other Trails of Cold Steel games seem to have somewhat lower reception from fans as well. But one thing is for sure: don't start the Trails franchise with game. Not only does it spoil the events of Trails to Azure, but the slow pacing and uneventful story might be enough to make you disinterested in the franchise.
2020
Sorry guys but I'm a time-traveller from the future and I regret to inform you that if you like this game or appreciate anything about it then you're just nostalgia blind. The future Persona 4 Remake does everything so much better that it's impossible to genuinely find anything to appreciate about this game or think that the game is worth preserving instead of replacing. Me and other fans of Persona 4 Rewind have come to the consensus that the opinions of fans of the original game aren't worth considering for that reason. Persona 4 never had any positive qualities before the remake and anyone who thinks otherwise clearly must have clouded judgment from nostalgia.
I see all these nostalgia blind reviews here praising this game to high heavens but don't you realize that this is fundamentally a PS2 game with chibi character models and outdated graphics? It's literally unplayable. It needed a remake to be even worthy of anyone's attention. How can there be anything good about a game like that?
All of you are praising the music of this old and worthless game but I listened to the old soundtrack on my shitty phone speakers after playing the remake on my new TV and found that the production quality of the new remixed soundtrack is much more modern. This completely invalidates any complaints you may have about the new remixes being "inferior" or the new singer "not fitting" the songs she's singing. Oh, and stop saying the old version of "I'll Face Myself" went harder. Yes, the new one sounds like a fan cover but come on guys, it's MORE MODERN.
And while you're at it, stop complaining about the new awakening scene being an in-engine cutscene instead of animated. There was nothing good about the original animated cutscenes, so I'm glad they were replaced with in-engine imitations. And the new animated cutscenes look better too, for all of you complaining about how the new scenes look "low budget" or have bad "cutscene direction", whatever that is.
And the dungeon crawling segments are SO MUCH BETTER IT'S NOT EVEN CLOSE, so stop talking about how "they didn't change anything" and "only added breakable objects".
All of these petty complaints, from the lighting, the voice acting, the character portraits are just the result of nostalgia bias toward a bad and outdated game that must be replaced and erased from history. You may think you like the characters, the story, the music, the cutscenes, the voice acting, the combat, the art... but you don't. You don't know what you like, and because the remake is the newest and DEFINITIVE EDITION of Persona 4 (as stated by Atlus), then all aspects of it MUST be better. ...Yes, the remake is the only version of Persona 4 that I played, but why does that matter?
...
If it wasn't clear by now, nothing I've said up to this point has been serious. Here's my real review:
4.5 out of 5 stars. Not looking forward to the remake at all.
I see all these nostalgia blind reviews here praising this game to high heavens but don't you realize that this is fundamentally a PS2 game with chibi character models and outdated graphics? It's literally unplayable. It needed a remake to be even worthy of anyone's attention. How can there be anything good about a game like that?
All of you are praising the music of this old and worthless game but I listened to the old soundtrack on my shitty phone speakers after playing the remake on my new TV and found that the production quality of the new remixed soundtrack is much more modern. This completely invalidates any complaints you may have about the new remixes being "inferior" or the new singer "not fitting" the songs she's singing. Oh, and stop saying the old version of "I'll Face Myself" went harder. Yes, the new one sounds like a fan cover but come on guys, it's MORE MODERN.
And while you're at it, stop complaining about the new awakening scene being an in-engine cutscene instead of animated. There was nothing good about the original animated cutscenes, so I'm glad they were replaced with in-engine imitations. And the new animated cutscenes look better too, for all of you complaining about how the new scenes look "low budget" or have bad "cutscene direction", whatever that is.
And the dungeon crawling segments are SO MUCH BETTER IT'S NOT EVEN CLOSE, so stop talking about how "they didn't change anything" and "only added breakable objects".
All of these petty complaints, from the lighting, the voice acting, the character portraits are just the result of nostalgia bias toward a bad and outdated game that must be replaced and erased from history. You may think you like the characters, the story, the music, the cutscenes, the voice acting, the combat, the art... but you don't. You don't know what you like, and because the remake is the newest and DEFINITIVE EDITION of Persona 4 (as stated by Atlus), then all aspects of it MUST be better. ...Yes, the remake is the only version of Persona 4 that I played, but why does that matter?
...
If it wasn't clear by now, nothing I've said up to this point has been serious. Here's my real review:
4.5 out of 5 stars. Not looking forward to the remake at all.
2012
Roguelikes give you the feeling of having to build a house of cards over and over after it keeps falling down. Some people seem to like that but for me losing progress is like the worst feeling in the world. If the actual mechanics were fun I might be willing to put up with that but I'm sorry this game is just not fun
This review contains spoilers
The greatest gaming experience ever created by man. Future historians will look back and wonder how this game's brilliance remained unmatched for centuries. Perfection, thy name is Pom! Pom! Party! Oh, and Trails to Azure is okay too I guess.
Alright, enough joking around. I'll attempt to write a serious review of this game. It's not going to be easy though, because the story went in a direction that kind of left me speechless.
I'm sure you've seen the trope where at the eleventh hour the twist villain is revealed to be an important person that the protagonists trusted. Trails to Azure has this trope, but the game takes it a step further. After the eleventh hour twist villain is revealed, at the TWELFTH hour a new twist villain is revealed that undoes the previous twist villain. This new twist villain is potentially the most baffling one yet. In Trails to Azure we go from thinking the chancellor of Erebonia is going to be the villain, to having the friendly Mayor being revealed as the twist villain, to having the true puppet master being revealed to be... the lawyer who works in the building down the street? It was bad enough in Trails from Zero when the cult mastermind was revealed to be the fishing doctor.
It's weird because while the Mayor being the twist villain was more predictable, I think he worked as a more fitting final adversary. He was using morally questionable methods to accomplish something good for the people of Crossbell: Independence and safety from invading countries. The protagonists attempting to defeat him means they would have to come to terms with the fact that they're fighting to put Crossbell back in danger. This confrontation does happen, but it's quickly thrown aside in favor of the new twist villain who can be considered to be a less epic antagonist. Going from taking on the self-appointed president of the Independent State of Crossbell to taking on a measly lawyer just feels like a bit of a downgrade. And the laywer doesn't even get a boss fight. This laywer was so convicted in his beliefs that he shot Lloyd's brother, but he was convinced to give up his plan after a simple speech from Lloyd. I just don't think that's a very strong villain, even if it's consistent with the Laywer's character.
Despite the strangeness surrounding the twist villains, I do actually like the endgame. Just as the Mayor was thrown aside as a villain, the Laywer was too. The ultimate antagonist of the game can be said to be KeA herself, even though she's not really a villain. The Lawyer and Mayor being thrown aside allowed the final confrontation of the game to be about convincing KeA that she doesn't need to take on the burden of rewriting all the wrongs of the world. It's a more heartfelt endgame scenario than your average JRPG. I'd have to say that on the whole I really enjoyed the story of Trails to Azure, even if I thought the twist villain was weird. You could call it directionless at points but that's because the game keeps you in the dark as to where the story is going for a very long time.
I really like this cast of characters, probably even more than the cast of the Trails in the Sky games. Even though they're just coworkers in a police department, they resembled a family by the end of the duology.
I enjoyed the new additions to combat like Master Quartz and the Burst ability. I think I've finally reached the point where I can say I like the combat system. Granted, I would never choose to play without the turbo mode on.
The soundtrack here can be a bit of a mixed bag at points. The basic battle theme is my least favorite so far. Luckily, the endgame bosses have some of the best music that the series has to offer.
I like this game. I think I like Trails in the Sky the 3rd as an overall package more but I enjoyed the moment-to-moment experience more in Azure. It could be argued that it's the best Trails game I've played but there's definitely some things about it that don't sit right with me. But maybe that's why it's easily the most interesting Trails game to think about so far.
Alright, enough joking around. I'll attempt to write a serious review of this game. It's not going to be easy though, because the story went in a direction that kind of left me speechless.
I'm sure you've seen the trope where at the eleventh hour the twist villain is revealed to be an important person that the protagonists trusted. Trails to Azure has this trope, but the game takes it a step further. After the eleventh hour twist villain is revealed, at the TWELFTH hour a new twist villain is revealed that undoes the previous twist villain. This new twist villain is potentially the most baffling one yet. In Trails to Azure we go from thinking the chancellor of Erebonia is going to be the villain, to having the friendly Mayor being revealed as the twist villain, to having the true puppet master being revealed to be... the lawyer who works in the building down the street? It was bad enough in Trails from Zero when the cult mastermind was revealed to be the fishing doctor.
It's weird because while the Mayor being the twist villain was more predictable, I think he worked as a more fitting final adversary. He was using morally questionable methods to accomplish something good for the people of Crossbell: Independence and safety from invading countries. The protagonists attempting to defeat him means they would have to come to terms with the fact that they're fighting to put Crossbell back in danger. This confrontation does happen, but it's quickly thrown aside in favor of the new twist villain who can be considered to be a less epic antagonist. Going from taking on the self-appointed president of the Independent State of Crossbell to taking on a measly lawyer just feels like a bit of a downgrade. And the laywer doesn't even get a boss fight. This laywer was so convicted in his beliefs that he shot Lloyd's brother, but he was convinced to give up his plan after a simple speech from Lloyd. I just don't think that's a very strong villain, even if it's consistent with the Laywer's character.
Despite the strangeness surrounding the twist villains, I do actually like the endgame. Just as the Mayor was thrown aside as a villain, the Laywer was too. The ultimate antagonist of the game can be said to be KeA herself, even though she's not really a villain. The Lawyer and Mayor being thrown aside allowed the final confrontation of the game to be about convincing KeA that she doesn't need to take on the burden of rewriting all the wrongs of the world. It's a more heartfelt endgame scenario than your average JRPG. I'd have to say that on the whole I really enjoyed the story of Trails to Azure, even if I thought the twist villain was weird. You could call it directionless at points but that's because the game keeps you in the dark as to where the story is going for a very long time.
I really like this cast of characters, probably even more than the cast of the Trails in the Sky games. Even though they're just coworkers in a police department, they resembled a family by the end of the duology.
I enjoyed the new additions to combat like Master Quartz and the Burst ability. I think I've finally reached the point where I can say I like the combat system. Granted, I would never choose to play without the turbo mode on.
The soundtrack here can be a bit of a mixed bag at points. The basic battle theme is my least favorite so far. Luckily, the endgame bosses have some of the best music that the series has to offer.
I like this game. I think I like Trails in the Sky the 3rd as an overall package more but I enjoyed the moment-to-moment experience more in Azure. It could be argued that it's the best Trails game I've played but there's definitely some things about it that don't sit right with me. But maybe that's why it's easily the most interesting Trails game to think about so far.
It's Trails but with a new cast of characters and now you're playing as police officers instead of bracers.
The police in this game have a sort of friendly rivalry with the bracers. This is a fun way of incorporating characters from previous games without their presence overshadowing the main cast, but it does help point out that classic Trails characters overshadowing the main cast is a potential issue. In the story, the main cast of Trails From Zero don't want to be outdone by Estelle and Joshua. And even though they address that problem narratively, I do think there was a part of the game where Estelle and Joshua being present could potentially overshadow the main cast. I'd prefer that classic characters have a smaller role in a game that's establishing a new cast of characters. Otherwise the new characters never get their moment to shine. Luckily there were many moments in this game that let the new characters shine, but I do think they could have dialed back Estelle and Joshua's involvement for this particular game.
Trails from Zero is only half of a story, so I don't have the full picture on the main cast yet. But I enjoyed the seeing characters' stories so far. I do think that the main cast gets along together too well though. It may have been more interesting to have their friendships develop over the course of the game than have them become friends immediately.
The plot of this game is a bit on the insane side, but I enjoyed it the whole way through. It's neat that this is a JRPG that is initially about policemen taking on the mafia within a crime-infested city. That's not something you see often, so it's enjoyable even just for the novelty. And while the story takes a wild left turn toward the end, I enjoyed the direction the story ultimately took. But there's a part of me that wishes that the story continued to be about the mafia instead of changing course when all the setup for the mafia story had been done.
My biggest issue with Trails From Zero is that the main villain of the game is kind of lame. This is a game with a bunch of interesting and well developed characters, so when the villain was revealed my reaction was "THAT'S who it is??" There's not even anything necessarily wrong with how the character was written. It was just a weird-ass choice to make the character a villain. I think the villain being a character who fits the role better would have made for a more compelling finale.
The combat is Trails combat. I pretty much know the drill by now, but I enjoyed it a lot more this time because there was a built-in speed up function. Granted, the game shouldn't have needed a speed up button to be fun. The biggest flaw with Trails combat is how slow it is and that remains true, because it's actually pretty enjoyable when sped up beyond what was originally intended. I played through most of the game on speed up mode. I feel like this game is easier than the previous ones, but that's probably because I know what I'm doing with the combat system now, as well as the fact that attack animations don't take 2 years to complete when sped up.
The music is good, although Trails in the Sky the 3rd is still the highpoint of Trails music from what I've played. This game takes second place for music. There are some nice non-combat tracks here but some of the combat tracks sound a bit generic or low energy. They delivered on the boss themes though, as they tend to do.
The last thing I'll bring up is that the support requests are a pretty sizable step down from the side stories in Trails in the Sky the 3rd. The support requests can occasionally lead to some amusing scenarios, but I'd much much rather learn more about the extended cast of characters than do a bunch of fetch-quests. But narratively it makes sense for the main characters to do fetch quests, so I ended up completing a good amount anyway.
I like this game. It's my second favorite behind Trails in the Sky the 3rd so far. The story isn't over after beating Trails from Zero so I can't make my full judgement on the Crossbell arc yet. But what I really appreciate about Trails from Zero is that even though it's a new story it still follows up on unresolved plot points from the previous games. And I think for that reason alone it's worth sticking with this series even if not every game ends up being a winner.
The police in this game have a sort of friendly rivalry with the bracers. This is a fun way of incorporating characters from previous games without their presence overshadowing the main cast, but it does help point out that classic Trails characters overshadowing the main cast is a potential issue. In the story, the main cast of Trails From Zero don't want to be outdone by Estelle and Joshua. And even though they address that problem narratively, I do think there was a part of the game where Estelle and Joshua being present could potentially overshadow the main cast. I'd prefer that classic characters have a smaller role in a game that's establishing a new cast of characters. Otherwise the new characters never get their moment to shine. Luckily there were many moments in this game that let the new characters shine, but I do think they could have dialed back Estelle and Joshua's involvement for this particular game.
Trails from Zero is only half of a story, so I don't have the full picture on the main cast yet. But I enjoyed the seeing characters' stories so far. I do think that the main cast gets along together too well though. It may have been more interesting to have their friendships develop over the course of the game than have them become friends immediately.
The plot of this game is a bit on the insane side, but I enjoyed it the whole way through. It's neat that this is a JRPG that is initially about policemen taking on the mafia within a crime-infested city. That's not something you see often, so it's enjoyable even just for the novelty. And while the story takes a wild left turn toward the end, I enjoyed the direction the story ultimately took. But there's a part of me that wishes that the story continued to be about the mafia instead of changing course when all the setup for the mafia story had been done.
My biggest issue with Trails From Zero is that the main villain of the game is kind of lame. This is a game with a bunch of interesting and well developed characters, so when the villain was revealed my reaction was "THAT'S who it is??" There's not even anything necessarily wrong with how the character was written. It was just a weird-ass choice to make the character a villain. I think the villain being a character who fits the role better would have made for a more compelling finale.
The combat is Trails combat. I pretty much know the drill by now, but I enjoyed it a lot more this time because there was a built-in speed up function. Granted, the game shouldn't have needed a speed up button to be fun. The biggest flaw with Trails combat is how slow it is and that remains true, because it's actually pretty enjoyable when sped up beyond what was originally intended. I played through most of the game on speed up mode. I feel like this game is easier than the previous ones, but that's probably because I know what I'm doing with the combat system now, as well as the fact that attack animations don't take 2 years to complete when sped up.
The music is good, although Trails in the Sky the 3rd is still the highpoint of Trails music from what I've played. This game takes second place for music. There are some nice non-combat tracks here but some of the combat tracks sound a bit generic or low energy. They delivered on the boss themes though, as they tend to do.
The last thing I'll bring up is that the support requests are a pretty sizable step down from the side stories in Trails in the Sky the 3rd. The support requests can occasionally lead to some amusing scenarios, but I'd much much rather learn more about the extended cast of characters than do a bunch of fetch-quests. But narratively it makes sense for the main characters to do fetch quests, so I ended up completing a good amount anyway.
I like this game. It's my second favorite behind Trails in the Sky the 3rd so far. The story isn't over after beating Trails from Zero so I can't make my full judgement on the Crossbell arc yet. But what I really appreciate about Trails from Zero is that even though it's a new story it still follows up on unresolved plot points from the previous games. And I think for that reason alone it's worth sticking with this series even if not every game ends up being a winner.
Not the best party game ever. Not that interesting of an idea for a Mario & Sonic crossover either. Doesn't utilize either IP that well. But it's competent in its own way I guess
The popular criticism with this one is that it's just the GBA game with multiplayer but like... that's why it's so good? WarioWare has always been better as a multiplayer party game than a single player experience.
This one in particular has some really creative game modes that really make the experience. Probably one of the best party games I've played. It has no right being as fun as it is
This one in particular has some really creative game modes that really make the experience. Probably one of the best party games I've played. It has no right being as fun as it is
I played this a lot back in the day but I doubt I'd ever play another Animal Crossing game to be honest. Even in a game that's not goal oriented such as Animal Crossing, we tend to create our own goals in order to enjoy the experience more. But even with the knowledge that Animal Crossing is a game without a goal, I still played it with a sort of completionist mindset. I tried to get the biggest house, the most amount of bells, the golden shovel or whatever, all the fossils for the museum... And having played the game in that way, I feel there's almost nothing a new Animal Crossing game can do that would make it a new or interesting experience for me.
I'm not a casual gamer. I play a game to beat the system and win. I even carry this mindset over to casual games like Animal Crossing. So I exhausted all of the game's surprises in an attempt to find some achievement in its systems, and what I found is that I fundamentally don't enjoy playing the game at its core - aside from the content treadmill that was leading me to complete the goals I set for myself. I think Animal Crossing is more for someone looking for a cozy experience talking with animal townsfolk than someone who's looking to max out a game's systems. I don't fit within the cozy gamer demographic so I think this series is just not for me.
I'm not a casual gamer. I play a game to beat the system and win. I even carry this mindset over to casual games like Animal Crossing. So I exhausted all of the game's surprises in an attempt to find some achievement in its systems, and what I found is that I fundamentally don't enjoy playing the game at its core - aside from the content treadmill that was leading me to complete the goals I set for myself. I think Animal Crossing is more for someone looking for a cozy experience talking with animal townsfolk than someone who's looking to max out a game's systems. I don't fit within the cozy gamer demographic so I think this series is just not for me.
An extremely slow starting point for the Trails series. Fortunately, it does eventually get more interesting... it just takes the entire damn game to get to that point. It feels like Trails in the Sky Second Chapter is the JRPG I thought this game was going to be while Trails in the Sky First Chapter is a pretty uneventful but necessary prequel. The first game is mostly familiarizing yourself with the setting of Trails and giving a shallow introduction to characters who turn out to be a lot more fleshed out in future games. The second game is where the actual adventure takes place - or at least the adventure that's most relevant to Estelle and Joshua as characters.
Did they really need two games to tell the initial story of Estelle and Joshua? I suppose they probably did. I can't really think of a graceful way to fit the events of Trails 1 and Trails 2 in one game. But I do think the story of Trails 1 is just a bit on the boring side for most of the campaign. Maybe it had to be that way. After all, you can't continuously elevate the stakes of a story if you start at maximum intensity.
I don't think the combat system in Trails 1 plays to its strengths well due to only making interesting use of the grid system near the end of the game, but future games make up for this. My major complaint with the combat system is the same as with all of the games in the Sky trilogy: it's too damn slow.
I think this game desperately needs a remake. Not because I think remaking the game would elevate it to masterpiece status - far from it. But if Falcom is telling new players to start with this game then they need it to make as good of a first impression as possible. And let me tell you, it definitely does NOT make a good first impression. Increasing the production values and adding voice acting for every line could go a long way toward making the game more approachable. They would definitely need to increase the speed of the combat as well. And personally I think some skillful remixes could make the soundtrack feel a lot less generic.
This definitely isn't the masterpiece JRPG that some claim it is, but it's the starting point for a long line of JRPGs that are much more impressive. Trails in the Sky was a game that I forced myself to play through while not massively enjoying it, but I'd say it was definitely worth it because I got to a point with future games where I was playing for the sheer enjoyment rather than forcing myself to play it so I could see why other people liked the games.
Did they really need two games to tell the initial story of Estelle and Joshua? I suppose they probably did. I can't really think of a graceful way to fit the events of Trails 1 and Trails 2 in one game. But I do think the story of Trails 1 is just a bit on the boring side for most of the campaign. Maybe it had to be that way. After all, you can't continuously elevate the stakes of a story if you start at maximum intensity.
I don't think the combat system in Trails 1 plays to its strengths well due to only making interesting use of the grid system near the end of the game, but future games make up for this. My major complaint with the combat system is the same as with all of the games in the Sky trilogy: it's too damn slow.
I think this game desperately needs a remake. Not because I think remaking the game would elevate it to masterpiece status - far from it. But if Falcom is telling new players to start with this game then they need it to make as good of a first impression as possible. And let me tell you, it definitely does NOT make a good first impression. Increasing the production values and adding voice acting for every line could go a long way toward making the game more approachable. They would definitely need to increase the speed of the combat as well. And personally I think some skillful remixes could make the soundtrack feel a lot less generic.
This definitely isn't the masterpiece JRPG that some claim it is, but it's the starting point for a long line of JRPGs that are much more impressive. Trails in the Sky was a game that I forced myself to play through while not massively enjoying it, but I'd say it was definitely worth it because I got to a point with future games where I was playing for the sheer enjoyment rather than forcing myself to play it so I could see why other people liked the games.
Never played the original so this remake is all I know about the game... and the series by extension. I enjoyed what I played but I thought it was pretty short and underwhelming in some areas. Like I thought the final boss was going to have another phase once he turned into a dragoon, but then he just stopped flying and fell into the ocean. I don't know what this remake got wrong or right but apparently people don't like it very much. But while the visuals definitely aren't the most impressive ever, a lot of the problems seem to stem from the source material rather than the remake. It's a fun and short campaign but far from the most exciting rail-shooter ever made - and that likely extends to the original game as well.