thracia is a game that really wants you to reexamine some behaviors and thoughts that you may have considered intrinsic to playing video games. is it worth it to strive for perfection? is fairness really the end goal of difficulty? is there really no honor in cheating? the most common statement you'll see about this game is that it's brutal, and the second most common statement you'll see about this game is that it's "just unfair to new players, but not that hard". neither of these statements are quite true; thracia is a very difficult game, and it is especially unkind to blind players, but it's paradoxically very effectively balanced. for the most part, this isn't a game where you're being put up against enemies way stronger than you, or a game where the enemies are given tons of toys you can't have. thracia is about trying to turn every disadvantage you're given into an advantage, and trying to win by choosing not to play within what the game presents as it's "rules" at all. to me, thracia feels very genuinely revolutionary in a way the prior 4 FEs, all also about revolutions, did not. the fatigue system means you are not allowed to be picky about your units, and you do not get your usual assortment of nobles and world-renown warriors. instead, you get a heck of a lot of bandits and sellswords, not to mention a handful of priests and illegitimate children. speaking of those bandits and priests, they are universally your MVPs in thracia. thracia has a very strong sense of materialism, both in it's plot and mechanics, which means that stealing and capturing weapons is simply your only option for acquiring weapons and money. this means that utility units are much stronger than in any other fire emblem game; not only because you have to steal to survive, but also because disarming is often a better option than just directly killing. why should i murder reinhardt when if i berserk him then sleep him i can get him to thin his troops and steal his gear? why should i bother fighting all these mages when i can send lifis in and just take all their books instead? this stuff brings a really interesting sense of resource management to thracia, and means that the player has theoretically nearly infinite opportunities to get good weapons, but has to gauge whether or not it's worth going for them each time they fight. this is furthered by making villages occasionally very difficult extras to get, and the addition of missable gaiden chapters help this greatly too. thracia has a very strong conception of risk vs reward; to simply clear the maps, you often have very easy and simple options, but simply clearing the maps is rarely enough. you are forced to take gambles to survive, but you are never expected to be perfect. a 100% playthrough of this game would likely increase the playtime by more than half off resets alone, but i don't think that that is a mistake or a negative. to me, thracia is rather genius in that it puts so much decisionmaking in the player's hands, and so little of that decisionmaking directly relates to killing. a good amount of your units can reliably crit, so cutting through enemies isn't something you need to worry too much about.. instead, what you're concerned with is not bleeding out on resources, making sure your units can avoid status effect spam, making sure you can have your units available when you need them. is it bullshit that you can be hit from halfway across the map by a sleep staff in enemy phase? sure. but i can silence that staffer, i can berserk them, i can steal their sleep staff.. you just have so many options, and just killing them is usually the least effective and least interesting one! in another strategy game, this sort of thing would be considered cheese, but here, it's life. you have the option to play "honorably" and fight like a man, sure, but are the enemies fighting honorably? hell no. fuck em. to me, this is exactly the sort of difficulty a strategy game should have. extremely lethal, extremely diverse, and not fair at all... but filled with options for interesting decisionmaking instead of just overstatting brute force ai. there is very little division between what you can do and what the ai can do. the defining difference is that you are not a bot.
STORY SPOILERS AHEAD
storytelling in thracia is another big strength. i think that the very restrained focus here helps a lot with character building and thematics. prior fire emblem games were all extremely grand continent-spanning high fantasy stories, which isn't a problem for those games at all, but i do feel that occasionally the macro scale of those stories meant that we could not feel the struggles of individual characters so closely. even mystery of the emblem, which does have a similar style of gameplay and a comparable story to thracia, is so zoomed out that i could hardly tell you what marth or caeda are feeling about what's happening. by contrast, leif is excellently built up, undergoing strong development through many losses. leif is someone who was born into natural conditions fit for traditional heroism, but is also someone who is given plenty reason to believe that his rebellion will only crush hope. prior lords had generally been characterized by naivety and great kindness; marth had been unable to accept that his allies had turned against him, sigurd had so much faith in the goodness of others that he ended up blind to conspiracy, celica loved alm so much that she was willing to suffer and sacrifice her cause for his sake. leif is anything but naive, and his kindness is often hardly virtuous. leif is racked with self-doubt at every turn, and when he is not, his ignorance and rash attitude bites him in the ass. he wants to save his people and repay the debts of his childhood at all costs, even though it has him taking on more than he can handle. his nobility alienates him from causes that much of his army is fighting for. many of his flaws would make him seem not so dissimilar from the friegian generals he's up against, but the important part is that leif learns from his mistakes as time goes on, and he never gives up. by the end of the game, his title of sage-lord doesn't feel farfetched. the enemy factions in thracia are also very well characterized. one detail i especially like is that the infamous thracian dracoknights rarely show up at all unless they're trying to seize an objective before you, and they're extremely lazy units. they don't leave their posts until you get in their range or split up your units, and they always leave the map when you kill their commander. this gets across very well that south thracia has little passion for the war they've been paid to fight in, they only see their alliance with the empire opportunistically. my only complaint with the story is that the final few chapters feel like a bit of afterthought or obligation story-wise, the audience just doesn't get a lot of in-universe justification for why the strategy is being executed the way it is, probably because it diverges from genealogy at this point. saving eyvel and defeating raydrik both make sense, but the loptrian church has very little personal relevance to the cast here. it didn't bother me because the last stretch of the game is sheer excellence from a gameplay perspective, but i do feel it's worth noting.
some minor notes i couldn't fit in here:
door key softlocks are really dumb and probably the single worst part of this game
chapter 12x and 14x are objectively quite poorly designed chapters for very different reasons; 12x is a chapter that feels almost deliberately designed for you to not engage with playing it, and 14x is a fog of war chapter that has long range troops and random pegasus knight spawns which can capture your units but you can't capture back. i think 14x is still effective narratively, but it's one of the only moments where i felt that thracia was sadistic in a way the player could not appropriately respond to or work around without foreknowledge or with clever strategy.
the variety in objectives is a huge plus for thracia and something i wish had been implented sooner. escape maps and survival maps are both awesome

kingdom hearts is probably the most controversial JRPG franchise of all time. it's very common to see non-fans say they can't take it seriously and it's influence ruined franchises they prefer, and it is equally common to see fans say it changed their life and brings them to tears to think about. i think i come somewhere in the middle; kingdom hearts 1 is a pretty moving and cute story for it's target demographic, but it has a lot of clear growing pains that i feel could have been better addressed. the story is probably what i'd single out as the biggest strong point of kh1, it's a very pleasant little story preaching self-belief and perseverance with a lot of fun character moments. the disney stuff, for me, doesn't exactly help but doesn't really hurt. donald and goofy are enjoyable party members that don't really feel too far off from your standard comic relief party members in final fantasy games such as rikku or cait sith. i'm not sure if i'd say the friendship of the party feels especially believable by the end, but it works for the type of story kh1is trying to get across. the original characters are all also pretty fun; i'm not much of a fan of sora, since he feels very stock shonen protagonist, but riku and kairi are both fairly interesting characters. the (unintentional?) gay subtext with sora and riku is definitely the most interesting part of the character interactions in this game, it really oozes out of almost everything riku says and makes things between him and sora a bit more complicated than it initially seems. i felt that the big weakness of kh1's story came down largely to it's focus on the disney elements. many of the worlds are very stripped down versions of movie plots, which aren't really satisfying on their own and aren't really great fanservice, imo. several of my favorite disney movies actually are in kh1, but the only one i felt really happy with the representation for was nightmare before christmas. the good part of this is that the worlds are pretty short and breezy, with very little story, so if you aren't much of a disney fan they aren't tedious or anything. the bad part of this is that the overarching plot still does involve a lot of disney elements up until the last quarter or so, so if you want more meat you're going to be waiting for a while.
where i'm more mixed on kh1 is the gameplay. i played on proud mode, because i wanted to fully engage with the combat and uh... that was a mistake! not because i had too much trouble with the combat, but because kh1 has pretty minimal depth to it's combat, and the boss design can get downright atrocious. the pot centipede, giant ursula, genie jafar, chernabog, basically all of the final bosses, dragon maleficent.. there's so many fights in this game that i wouldn't call hard necessarily but would really call cheesy or boring. for most of the larger bosses the recommended strategy from experienced players is to just mash on them with aero/ra/ga and spam heals when you can with leaf bracer. i only really struggled with a handful of fights, but i would have a lot of trouble naming fights that i struggled on where the difference maker ended up being my skill rather than missing a specific spell or not using a specific summon that trivialized it. things reach a head after the first visit to hollow bastion, because beyond that point kh1 really loves throwing bosses with inflated health bars at you, and in the worst cases, those bosses have a vulnerability window of maybe 2-3 attacks if you're playing fair with them. if that sounds obnoxious and boring, that's because it is, so the recommended strategy for most of these bosses is to make sure to get aeroga and curaga and just wail on them. the room of waves of heartless being spawned on you is also just atrocious, pure chaos with very little counterplay beyond tanking. smart, aggressive play simply does not feel well-incentivized in kh1. i'd say the real peak of the game feeling challenging in a fun way would be the mid-game before you get leaf bracer, and the last fight on the first visit to hollow bastion. that fight kicked my ass a good 4 or 5 times, but it was engaging, fast, lethal, and made me want to get better. i can only hope that future kh games follow that precedent.

asides:
the ff characters in this game, imo, often didn't really act like themselves. squall, i mean leon, especially felt mischaracterized. not a big deal because the story isn't focused on them or anything but as a big fan of 8 i found it a little sad.
music is incredible, i'd mention the heartless theme, kairi's theme, the main theme, and obviously simple and clean as highlights. yoko shimomura is a great fit here, since she's experienced in music for kid's games from the mario rpg series but also has the range for more serious and heartfelt tracks.
the animation is surprisingly very high quality and emotive for a ps2 game, it seems like they really wanted to lean into disney animation principles. genie donald and goofy are all highlights in that regard

panzer dragoon saga is a game with a reputation, to say the least. most of the reviews of saga on this very site spend more time masturbating to the game’s rarity or building up the game’s prestige. this isn’t gonna be that! lol. i really enjoyed my time with PDS, but i don’t really buy into the exclusive narrative that’s been built around it. this isn’t a rare gem shining in the rough, anyone with a computer made in the last decade can go play it right now.
so if panzer dragoon saga isn’t an underrated gem or a masturbatory retro gamer status symbol, what is it? the obvious answer would be that panzer dragoon saga is very unique. members of team andromeda have identified themselves in the years since release as being driven by counter cultural tendencies, wanting to make something fully their own, and that streak of contrarianism certainly does run all over saga. unlike most JRPGs, saga isn’t a character driven game or a plot driven game. saga’s selling point is a lot closer to what we’ve seen in WRPGs that followed it, it’s a game about a lifelike and lore-rich world, where the story is more of an excuse to get the player to engage with it. like the previous PD games, the environmental storytelling is superb, but what i find especially impressive about saga is just how much flavor text is present and just how much detail is thought out for how these imaginary people are able to live. saga is surprisingly textual for a game of its era and with its limitations. for every monster you see, there’s a description of how it’s shell is hollowed out into bowls, or how the stomach is dried into water bags. this focus is refreshing, but it’s also somewhere i could see they could have done more. for a game with such an emphasis on a living world, the way saga handles character interaction is often stilted and limited. a good amount of the playtime in saga is spent in the “village” segments, where the player is essentially exploring populated environments and gathering information, and oftentimes these segments have information that is locked behind talking to characters multiple times or talking to specific characters in a specific order. this means that the pacing of the game, while quick, often feels held up by trial and error. i don’t mind this too much in the main story, because i always enjoyed the dialogue, but it was very deflating to learn that i had missed plenty of side content simply because i hadn’t spent time repeatedly talking to npcs with unchanging dialogue. to me, it also felt disappointing that sidequests were limited in their scope. it feels very cool to go on a hunting mission and solve an environmental puzzle to get medicine to save a villagers life… but it feels a lot less cool when your reward is a stock weapon that you can get anywhere by the time you receive it. i was overjoyed in the few parts of the game when the player is rewarded for exploring with more background information or detail to the world, and wish those types of moments were more common. speaking of background information, saga actually does connect to the rail shooters that preceded it in a lot of really interesting ways, and I appreciate that it didn’t feel as though the game was trying hard to point it out to the audience. they mostly let you connect things yourself in relation to the other two games, which leads to a lot of cool moments that really does make the world feel as though it had always been considered in detail rather than made up as they went along.
one of the things i can give unambiguous praise to in saga is the battle system. i’ve always been a detractor of ATB in the final fantasy games, but saga is able to use its rail shooter roots to iterate on it in a way that makes every encounter engaging. instead of having 1 bar that counts for all options, you have 3, with a standard shot or laser taking up one bar and magic abilities taking up two. in addition, your dragon maneuvers through 4 quadrants around the enemy, with danger and safe zones depending on the enemies position and what attack they’re going for. your standard attacks can be fired with a single button press and can be chained without using up time, meaning effective players will be bobbing and weaving around enemies before unloading their gauges on weak positions. enemy behavior in saga is varied as well, making the player feel as though they’re on a hunt, needing to learn the biology of what they’re up against. in another tradition lifted from the rail shooters, the player is even graded on how well they handle individual encounters, with higher xp gains and item drops given based on better grades, so every encounter is engaging. you never feel like you’re better off brute forcing past the designed strategies, and you never feel like your time is being wasted, which is saying something when dealing with an ATB-like system. my only real complaint with the battle system is that magic feels unnuanced and implemented almost as an afterthought. magic isn’t bad when used against enemies that you don’t fully understand, but it’s not very rewarding to use and many spells just feel like the previous one but stronger. spell descriptions are also extremely unhelpful, giving you basically no hard knowledge for their gameplay application.
i am far from an expert musically but i’ll be damned if this isn’t one of the coolest OSTs i’ve ever heard. an inspired mix of world music and chunky synthesizers, the level of spectacle present in the battles is thankfully matched by the music. the dungeon music is more on the ambient side much of the time, but it’s still wonderful and complements the atmosphere beautifully.
where team andromeda’s countercultural ambitions really hurt the game, i feel, is in the story. sagas story has a very, very strong hook and tons of great ideas. i love the idea of a story where the protagonist is caught in a conflict fought between self-serving factions bickering on the brink of annihilation. i love the idea of the protagonist being more of an unwitting pawn being used by those around him, falling backwards into a political game beyond his understanding. i love the idea of a human weapon learning to be human, and feeling indebted to those who control her. i especially love the core theme of the story, which i won’t spoil here. the issue with PDS’ story is that i don’t feel any of these things. andromeda has been open that it was an active goal to avoid the melodrama that defines franchises like final fantasy in favor of a more subtle and contemplative plot, but i feel that what we get here doesn’t fulfill those intentions well either. the runtime leaves the emotional beats of the story feeling half-hearted and rushed, despite the excellent foundation. a version of panzer dragoon saga with even 2 or 3 more hours of meat to its plot might be worthy of the “best JRPG of all time” title, and what’s here is still very cerebral and thematically interesting, but I find it difficult to analyze a plot that I just don’t care about first. this is especially present in the character of Azel, who the plot revolves around, and is ostensibly intended to be the main character, but has woefully little screentime for how much could have been done with her. the core relationship between her and Edge is no Squall and Rinoa, and it doesn’t need to be, but it’s no Amuro and Lalah either.
all in all, is panzer dragoon saga the best rpg ever made or the most underrated game ever? is it worth 1,200 dollars on ebay? no, i don’t think so. but it is a game that I would wholeheartedly recommend to anyone who is even a little interested, because you will NEVER play a game like this again. saga is always happy to dance to the beat of its own 32-bit african-tribal-inspired drum. with synth flutes in the background. and lasers all over the screen.

for a long time, final fantasy was a franchise that didn't really have sequels. it was a franchise where each installment did something different, not as a correction to the prior game, but as a way to push the identity of the franchise further and try to show off what it could be in a different light. this changed with ffx-2, a game which i haven't played (yet). something notable about ffx-2 is that it was following up on one of the most critically acclaimed installments in the history of the franchise. the staff for it went in a radically different direction compared to ffx, because they wanted to keep the franchises' spirit of change and make it clear that they were still trying to take risks. what if ffx had been widely disliked? what if the key staff were concerned with change because they felt it was necessary to regain respect? well, a game like ffxiii-2 would probably happen.
xiii-2 is a game that feels insecure with it's existence. the staff for it clearly understood that for a lot of franchise veterans, xiii was not what they wanted. people didn't like how xiii's narrative was centered around developing a cast that started as extremely flawed characters, so now we've scaled back the cast and both of the main characters are generally likable from the get-go. people didn't like how linear the progression was in xiii, so now we've split the game into like 20 zones that you can choose to tackle in a variety of orders. people didn't like how xiii didn't have a lot of variety outside of combat, so we have puzzles. by GOD we have puzzles. the problem with xiii-2 is that they've followed the criticism based solely on what players directly said, rather than what they meant. sure, these zones are less linear, but they feel even more artificially restrictive than the zones in xiii, because the constant asset reusage means they have to put literal floating walls up to keep you out of certain areas. this zone reusage is a big problem in general, as it leads to a lot of what feels like backtracking, and it rarely if ever connects to the narrative. there's technically more reason to explore than you had in xiii, but it's not because the environments make you want to explore them, it's because they just put invisible collectables everywhere. the new main characters are less immediately flawed, but they have so little in the way of characterization that they feel dull. a lot of the complaints xiii got for it's cast can be chalked up in the first place to it's understated character writing, which slowly built towards an explosive conclusion for each of the characters. here, this is exaggerated to the maximum, with both serah and noel starting out as likable characters, getting little to no development over the next 20 hours, then speedrunning an arc in 30 minutes. the fact that there's more to do in theory here means little because the side content is a handful of casino games and puzzles that oscillate between being incredibly obnoxious and incredibly simple. the new, customizable monster system is very cute and seems like a cool idea, but to accommodate it the difficulty has been massively lowered across the board, meaning one of the biggest strengths of xiii (it's action-packed, fast-paced and nuanced combat system) has been neutered. i didn't feel that xiii was especially flawed to begin with, but the "fixes" here only serve to emphasize the issues present in that game. this isn't to say all the changes are universally bad; there are some nice quality of life changes to the combat. i appreciate that paradigm shifts no longer stop combat for the first animation, i like that you can now swap party leaders, and allowing the player to unlock whatever paradigms they feel like as they progress through the crystarium is a nice middle-ground between the controlled progress in xiii and something like the expert sphere grid. unfortunately, as i mentioned earlier, the balancing of xiii-2 being very weighted on the easy side means that these things don't get to shine as much as i'd like, but they are still nice changes and i appreciate what they were going for.

SPOILER TALK BEGINS HERE
the story in ffxiii-2 may be the most disappointing in the franchise. it has a strong concept that it feels violently opposed to doing anything with. i would LOVE a final fantasy game about time travel, but xiii-2's time travel mechanics follow no internal logic, and feel like an extended excuse to reuse zones and integrate cut content from xiii. the episodic structure the game gets from the time travel focus is a great idea in theory, but in practice it means that character development and plot progression is minimized, creating extremely lopsided pacing and no real plot. for the first 20 hours of the game, i was totally lost as to what anyone could see in this story, because many of the zones do not have any narrative conclusion. it's also very disappointing that, considering xiii didn't give much immediate background to it's world, we never get to time travel to a point before that game's ending. it would have been great worldbuilding to do quests in cocoon during peace-time, or to interact with the gran pulse tribes fang and vanille came from, but instead we're given a few zones that get repeated and the repetitions mostly have pretty similar storylines. when the time travel is integrated more solidly into the plot, it still fails to follow any logic. why can i erase a monster that creates the circumstances for a timeline's existence, and then still return to that timeline whenever i want? how can i "save the future" but the bad ending still persists like a wart? so much of the runtime is spent talking about these narrative mechanics, but none of that time is valuable because the narrative mechanics are complete and utter nonsense. it's not like FF8 or FF10, where there's some stuff that is logically questionable but the plot glosses it over, the entire plot hinges on a system that feels like an afterthought. caius is often brought up as a strength of this game's story, and yes, he's a cool antagonist with a strong presence, but his motivation is also nonsense; caius is motivated by the fact that history changing will inevitably kill yeul, a little girl who is reincarnated for reasons the plot doesn't care to get into. caius' solution to this is not to stand in the protagonist's way and try to correct the timeline that they alter, but rather to change the timeline even more, destroying the entire concept of history somehow, thereby allowing yeul to exist in eternity (if, you know, she didn't already die because literally all of time just got changed). forgiving the fact that this makes caius selfish in a way that is just utterly inhuman (it's not as though caius is in love with yeul, he's just given the duty of being her protector), caius' actions are essentially no different from the protagonists', which he explicitly disagrees with. when it comes to positives, noel is a pretty good character, and 700 AF: A Dying World is a great moment for the story, reminiscent of oerba from xiii. however, i can't act as though this moment was worth the strain it puts on the rest of the story. noel's backstory is very strong, but the story awkwardly sidesteps it for 20+ hours before we finally get there, both with frequent memory loss on noel's part and serah just... choosing not to ask questions? i feel like at that point we'd be better off making noel completely lose his memory at the start of the game, it feels so artificial to have him forget specifically the things that give context to the plot until the game is basically over. the ending is also emotionally pretty strong, though it's a very strange choice narratively because it means that the game disagrees with basically everything xiii had to say thematically... probably not what you want to do in a sequel, but considering the wealth of other ways this game feels reactionary to critique of xiii, i doubt that was an accident.

hey you know that rail shooter series we have? the one that's focused on atmosphere, environmental storytelling, and spectacle?
why don't we try putting it on a console that can't do any of those things
and can't handle a rail shooter
the music is a little cool because it's just an adaptation of zwei's music but basically all of it is misplaced (why am i hearing the music to a snow level in a desert level??)
this game reuses the same midboss in every level but the last lmao

the internet was a paradigm shift, wasn't it? since the late 90s we've seen an increasing amount of discussion around fact and fiction becoming muddied, with the distinction seemingly being irrelevant to many. information is as free as it gets, but the direct consequences for misinformation are minimal. of course, there's no end of works focusing on the subject of truth in the information age; in this very medium you have one of the most prescient and unique statements on the matter with MGS2. the persona 2 duology, however, is unique in that a lot of what it has to say feels before it's time. this is certainly an internet-age set of games, but calling them cyberpunk in any way would be a misnomer. persona 2 really is concerned about the broader societal implications that come about from people being willing and able to believe almost anything, and it directs that focus towards the physical world. in a lot of ways, P2 feels responsive towards the increasing prevalence of conspiracy theories in pop culture (a lot of popular conspiracies are even used as inspiration for plot beats in innocent sin), and i think P2 takes a unique stance in that they don't flat out deny that these things are worth believing in or looking into. rumors come to life, but rumors do have to start from somewhere; there's shreds of truth in any lie.
P2, and especially EP, puts a ton of emphasis on allowing the city to feel lived-in and breathing. for anything you do, there's new dialogue everywhere, and the main progression gimmick (rumors coming to life at the player's will) is utilized in a lot of clever ways to achieve that goal. persona games are known for being text-heavy in general, but i wouldn't be surprised if these two games had some of the larger scripts in the franchise, because every story moment basically changes the whole city. in a game all about listening to the pulse of the city, this feels very appropriate, creating a much stronger sense of immersion than you'd expect for a game like this.

now for stuff focused solely on EP:
out of all of the traditional storytelling archetypes, probably the most common for a JRPG to use is the coming of age story. this makes a lot of sense, logistically; most video game consumers are teenaged, most JRPG protagonists are teenaged, and the power fantasy typically inherent to the genre is about starting from a weak position and growing to be strong. eternal punishment doesn't have these sorts of goals, and it's a lot more engaging for it. EP's cast is a group of adults, and you'd be forgiven for thinking at the beginning of the game that this cast doesn't have much room to grow. indeed, EP's characters definitely do not "grow up" in the way typical for JRPG writing; these characters start out pretty divided and uncomfortable with each other, but there isn't a big climax where they confront their fears all at once and become a team. instead, EP uses optional dialogue to subtly paint a portrait of each of it's cast members and has them slowly begin to open up over time. it's rewarding and immersive to have these characters actually gain new contacts due to these little nuggets of development, and it's a much more lifelike approach to party development than you see in more traditional narratives. a key concept this game has about identity is that it's self-determined; people aren't simply on a search to discover how they really are, but are ever-changing and create the path they walk. i think integrating this into the story by making much of the development up to the player is exceptionally clever. it's a fairly common statement among writers attempting subversive character writing to say that human beings don't have arcs. i feel that this is often used to justify uninteresting or directionless character writing, but in EP it feels like a pretty considered thesis for the game's writing. i guess a better way of saying it is that people don't just have arcs, they don't grow up at one specific point. development here is more like a stream, ebbing and flowing.

STORY SPOILERS HERE
all that being said, eternal punishment was greenlit for a very specific reason; to give an alternate perspective to tatsuya. i also felt that this was done quite well. tatsuya was about as well-characterized as a silent protagonist could get in IS, i felt, but getting a voice definitely helps him. his self-imposed suicide mission is a great narrative hook, and the reasoning behind his existential guilt is one of the best reveals of the story. tatsuya commits (yet another) innocent sin by refusing to forget his friends again, and it's not surprising that he'd try to shoulder the burden to protect their reality. tatsuya is ultimately a character whose greatest weakness is his protective instinct, but through the comfort of the main cast he's able to get past that and use his sins as blessings. it's beautiful payoff for a story that's rife with personal loss and seemingly hopeless odds.
in a lot of ways, P2 reminds me of panzer dragoon saga. both are these hugely ambitious games from around the same time that are driven by the urge to do something different. when i played innocent sin, i felt that that game's attempts at novelty wore thin; the character writing didn't feel dense, the combat was far too easy, and the deviations from standards felt poorly justified by the narrative. although there are still things i dislike in EP, the overall package feels more cohesive. rumors are more immersive and offer more variety, character dialogue is more interesting, the combat and character progression is more difficult but offers more interesting decisionmaking. definitely a huge improvement.

kind of interesting to play from a historical perspective but definitely has some issues. this game has an exceptionally bland story. could have been ripped right from a 15 yo dungeon master's notes. the music is nice but considering in both book 1 and 2 you spend about half the game in a single area you're probably going to get tired of a lot of the tracks.
bump system is the defining mechanic w these games aaaand it's kinda whatever. i think it's less engaging than standard turn based combat and feels more stat-checky. in every situation where i got stuck it wasn't because i wasn't dodging or bumping well enough, it was because i didn't have a key item or was underleveled. grinding in this game is much less fun than in a standard jrpg e.g. dragon quest because you have to have your full attention but you're still not doing anything that's really fun, so it's neither relaxing or engaging. book 1 has kind of comically easy bosses, book 2 is more stacked against the player but doesn't feel like there's much strategic depth added, you just fireball instead of bumping most of the bosses
oh yeah everyone in this game calls all enemies "goons". it's very funny. some of the lock and key stuff is also pretty silly in a way i found charming ("yeah sorry i lost this magic orb guess i have a hole in my pocket or something")

genealogy of the holy war is, like gaiden before it, an attempt to emphasize the RPG in SRPG. to that extent it does an excellent job; genealogy has a more interesting and diverse cast of characters than prior installments, the plot has genuinely compelling thematic ideas, denser worldbuilding than can even be conveyed in it's runtime, and the gameplay interweaves with those thematics very well. genealogy blows every prior fire emblem story completely out of the park, it really is not close at all. i had trouble believing that this game was even written by the same person, though part of that is probably that the quality of the modern fan translation for genealogy is much much better than the translations for 1-3. also like gaiden, there's lots of big experiments for the franchise; the entire structure of how chapters play out is rethought, abilities have been introduced to freshen up combat, the famous generation gap exists, weapon rank has been introduced, the weapons triangle has been introduced, it goes on and on. the majority of these additions are really interesting and add a lot of depth, which is definitely welcome after fe3 felt a bit like an fe1 expansion pack. the biggest defining characteristic of fe4, to me, is that the game just feels HUGE. you're going through huge maps on a huge story with a huge army that has huge stats... and it takes a huge amount of time. 4's achilles heel is that it's a very padded game, the emphasis on the revamped arena system means that you can often spend over an hour optimizing and grinding units before a chapter even starts, and the chapters usually are equivalent to about 4-5 standard fire emblem chapters crammed together, most of them taking me anywhere between 1-4 hours to complete. the scale shouldnt be an inherent dealbreaker, but unfortunately these maps are just so large that much of the time spent in them isn't really in meat and potatoes SRPG stuff, instead you spend a lot of time walking across countries and maybe grinding out relationships on the way. when combat does happen, you're incentivized to finish it as quickly as possible, because fe4 has a habit of putting large blocks of enemies together and having them all swarm your units at once. the end result is a game where you're spending much more time prepping for a very intense 1-3 turn battle than actually fighting, which is definitely a bit disappointing. i get what they were going for, because elements like the arena grinding are interesting power fantasies at first and it does feel exhilarating to watch your stronger units go up against a swarm of soldiers like it's no problem, but it definitely wears on the player after 40+ hours of it. the weapon rank system is also very rough here, again leading to the issue i mentioned earlier where strong units get stronger and weak units get weaker over time. it is an absolute struggle to get some of your early game units (looking at you alec and noish) to be on par with your stronger units because they're locked to bad weapons. on the other side, your good units will often have more weapons than they know what to do with. once i get a brave lance on erin or a brave axe on lex, why would i ever use anything else? the other main issue i had with genealogy is more of an inherited issue from the games that preceded it, i felt the story was often told in too abstract a manner to connect with it emotionally. a lot of key plot points happen off screen or are portrayed through map sprites, and i found it hard to feel personally invested in the stakes of the story as a result. it also often felt to me that the story's dialogue being limited to castle seizes and the beginning of chapters meant that some of the more interesting topics (child hunts, radicalization, persecution, poverty) couldn't get explored as deeply as i would have liked. i can't fault them too much, because obviously they were simply using the format that they had used for 3 games, but considering how radical of a departure FE4's gameplay is, i wish they had been more willing to experiment with the way the story is delivered as well.

unfortunately doesn't really live up to the works it keeps reminding you it's inspired by. i love twin peaks, and i like the twilight zone a bit as well, but what i like about both of those works is the dense symbolism, story beats that work emotionally before logically, and the societal messaging. alan wake's story doesn't really have any of those things? it's not flat-out badly written at all, but i was left disappointed with the story because it shoots really high and keeps reminding you of that... but it doesn't really pan out into much more than a pretty uninteresting dark vs light contemporary fantasy story. there's some interesting stuff it could get into regarding writer's block and death of the author, but alan wake doesn't get too far into that, which is a real shame. i'd be able to get past this stuff if the game wasn't so obsessed with reminding you that it's supposed to be like twin peaks (seriously? the lamp lady? cmon), and i'm not holding this stuff against remedy's future installments bc there are definitely some flashes of brilliance occasionally here, just not enough to carry the story above average to me. character writing is great here though, very enjoyable and likable. when the game takes itself less seriously and allows that stuff to shine, the story is pretty fun.
as for gameplay, alan wake is a mixed bag for sure. the light system is innovative and a pretty cool idea, but enemies take too long to kill for how many the game throws at you, and the game pretty frequently forces you to kill a group of enemies before moving on. i don't think making a survival horror game more actiony is a bad idea inherently, but the waves upon waves of enemies feel present more to waste your time than to provide scares, and i never really found myself running out of resources and feeling unempowered. the hordes of enemies also feels very awkwardly integrated with the story, as it's a suuuper corny zombie-movie esque gameplay style that is being put up next to a (generally) dead serious surreal horror story. outside of the combat though, there are some interesting ideas here. alan wake is much more open than you'd expect for a cinematic set-piece type of game, which is pretty cool. i don't really find the forest setting most of the game takes place in to be too fun to explore, but i do respect the effort and i think the player is well-incentivized to engage w their environment through stuff like the manuscript pages.
always cool to get more story in a game like this, especially considering the focus of the story here.

i don't think it's any secret that games tend to be best at communicating through experience, and ico understands this excellently. you don't need this bond explained through text, and you don't need your goals exposited here. the oblique narrative on display is emotionally engrossing and guides the player's actions very effectively, while giving you a lot of stuff to guess about and discuss with other players. in most games, it would feel pretty silly ending off with a "fin", but i think ico's storytelling has more in common with european arthouse filmmaking than it does with other games, so it feels on-point. i did feel like the last quarter of the game didn't feel as thoughtful and considered as what preceded it, though, and the combat doesn't feel like much more than a waste of time. there needs to be some sort of a threat for this narrative to function, sure, but i feel like ico would almost be better off if you couldn't fight at all.
also, please change the cover for this game on here, jeez. why is it still using a boxart that is literally infamous for being misrepresentative and ugly

i technically didn't finish bc my xbox emulator will no longer load my save for this game for whatever reason but wow i found this really disappointing.
following up on saga's ending is a fool's errand by nature, but the way they do it feels like it just totally spits on what that game was trying to say, and it gives me a terrible taste in my mouth. going from a game that is all about how history shouldn't rule us, a game that provides a very definitive and satisfying end, and just... resetting the world to be even worse than when we last saw it is so uninspired and lazy. it's not even worse in a way that's interesting. what was the point of anything i did in saga if this is how the world is supposed to turn out? i can appreciate that they tried at all here, because the easy thing to do would have been to just make a reboot or a prequel or even just ignore the story entirely, but the story here doesn't justify it's own existence and takes up far more time than the story in the original 2 rail shooter games.
the soundtrack isn't anything special compared to the saturn trilogy, and by default the sound effects are about 3 times as loud as the music, so i think they might have been aware of this, lmao. on the subject of atmosphere, this game's environments are very lush and detailed, but feel lacking in art design compared to the saturn trilogy. orta feels like it's focus is more on providing the audience with as much stuff to look at as possible, so these environments are extremely dense and lifelike, but don't feel as though they have the melancholic tone that i loved so much in zwei and saga especially. the lack of pastel tones in favor of a lot of browns is especially noticeable, to me. it's a shame because the concept art for this game is wonderful, especially all of the art of orta's design, but it doesn't translate in-game.
to me, PD's appeal as a franchise is heavily rooted in it's lore and atmosphere, so we're already not off to a great start, but the real issue to me with orta is the gameplay. first off, orta is a very, very hard game. i'd say i'm an average level video game player, and i did fine in PD1 and 2, but orta outright kicked my ass, and not in a way that made me want to keep coming back. as i mentioned earlier, orta feels as though it's designed to overwhelm the player with visual noise, which leads to a lot of points when i lost health to things i couldn't even identify, or boss mechanics that I still don't really know how to counter. i could not fucking tell you what the second phase of the episode 8 boss actually does, to this day, man. bosses also feel like they had at least twice as much health than what was normal in the previous games, even mid-bosses for some reason. normal mode here feels more on par with the hard modes in previous panzer dragoons, whereas easy is maybe the easiest game in the franchise apart from saga, solely because you sponge hits easier. an actual middle ground would be greatly preferable to what we have here. the big issue with orta's gameplay, though, is that it's new mechanics feel like they crush the game and make the weaknesses of this genre more apparent than ever before. orta introduces two new mechanics, gliding/braking and transforming your dragon. both of these mechanics are clearly inspired by saga's battle system, which is a cute idea and feels like it should be the natural evolution of panzer dragoon's gameplay, but to me it doesn't feel that they work in tandem. gliding and braking is used to imitate saga's quadrant-based positioning system in boss fights, but these boss fights don't allow you to freely maneuver around the quadrants, instead making some quadrants only available through braking and some only available through gliding. you also can ONLY move to a quadrant by doing these moves, and the energetic nature of the bosses means that you're occasionally blocked off from moving at all, leading to the player feeling trapped and crushed. this is made worse by the fact that the dragon transformation only has glide/brake bars on two of the three dragons, and you cannot freely cycle through transformations, you have to go in a set order. the heavy dragon is the dragon the player is encouraged to use against bosses for dps, and it's also the dragon that cannot glide or brake at all. the glide dragon is much more maneuverable, but does very little damage, cannot lock on, and is recommended to use for the purpose of defense. if you were switching between just these forms, i could see the boss fights being an engaging mix of defensive maneuvering and taking advantage of burst windows, but there's also the normal dragon, which can do a little bit of everything, just not as well as either of the other two. this means you're generally going through at least 2 button presses to get where you're wanting to be in boss fights, and switching on the fly tends to feel clunky and unrefined. all of these limitations imposed on the way the game is played, in addition to the extremely chaotic sensory-overload level design, makes orta feel more blatantly on-rails than either of the previous games did. i found myself struggling against the game very often, which is never a feeling you want the player to have in a franchise that had previously sold itself on the exhilarating feeling of being free in flight. it's a real shame, because the game shows off the promise a true sequel to zwei has in it's 5th level, but it never realizes that promise.
there are two good games here, but those games don't want to play nice with each other.

a massive leap forward from it's predecessor in more or less every conceivable way.
panzer dragoon's idea was to take the limitations of it's format, a rail shooter, and use them as strengths. these games have a fixed length, so why not tune the soundtrack exactly to the environment? these games have to shock and dazzle the player, so why not use those environments to their full potential? these games have to be snappy with little time wasted, so why not make the player soak in every bit of lore and detail while they're playing? panzer dragoon wasn't excellent at all these things, but it was a very solid proof of concept (and a very fun game!).
zwei feels like that proof of concept really got a chance to shine on it's own. the environmental storytelling is amped up, with there being plenty of times the game just allows you to more or less stop and take a break to soak everything in. the spectacle is absolutely absurd as well; whereas panzer dragoon heavily relied on sprites and somewhat generic looking bugs and animals, zwei's art design focuses much more on making the polygonal creatures look that way by design rather than by limitation. this more unique art design is complimented by the increased prominence of the ancients and their bioengineered weaponry in the plot.
speaking of the plot, like the first game, it's very implicit and focused more on creating an atmosphere than a traditional story, but unlike the first game, there is genuine character here. instead of being just some guy whose body is hijacked by a dragon rider, your character has trained this dragon out of pity for it's misshapen form, and is on a quest for revenge against the ominous ship that destroyed his home. a revenge story isn't really anything too special for video games in general, but it does provide a narrative with which the gameplay can work in tandem. typically in a rail/arcade shooter, the destruction your character wreaks almost makes you feel villainous. why am i destroying villages and blowing up everything in my path in afterburner, for instance? in contrast, it makes logical sense here that the hyper-aggressive gameplay style established in the first game would be the way your character reacts, and the downbeat desolate tone of the environments makes your character's rampage feel like a speck of dust amidst a world that has experienced far worse than this.
when it comes to gamefeel, zwei is a big improvement as well. your dragon feels far more maneuverable and the game feels far more readable. i never felt that the visual noise made it too difficult to see or aim, and i felt more incentivized to dodge and maneuver than i ever did in PD1. the new berserk mechanic is a good way to help struggling players by offering an extended screenwipe, but it thankfully doesn't trivialize bosses and offers a good degree of strategy to it's use. the multishot gun is a very positive change that my thumbs greatly appreciated, and it no longer feels like homing shots are the best option against all quick enemies. the game as a whole is definitely more forgiving and easier than PD1, but much of that difficulty decrease feels as though it comes down to the game being designed in a way that feels more fair and less chaotic. I had a much lower accuracy rating on all of the levels compared to PD1, as well, so i imagine if you're a score-focused player this overall difficulty decrease wouldn't stop you from feeling incentivized to return.

truly one of the best sequels ever made. kingdom hearts 2 improves massively on every aspect of it’s charming but flawed predecessor. at least on critical, the combat is polished to a sheen, with a really refreshing balance between straight-forward inputs and nuanced resource management. combos are dead simple, but kh2 isn’t really about combos in the first place. instead, the player is forced to consider their resources moment-to-moment, and how to get as much as they can out of everything. a lot of these battles are very tight squeezes (or at least they were for me, as i’m a bit inexperienced w action games), and it’s extremely satisfying to win because of a perfectly timed drive form or clever choice of summon. in this sense, i think KH2 gets a lot of mileage out of its fusion of character action and JRPG mechanics. it’s very approachable on a basic mechanical level, but still offers enough nuance to where players can feel confident that they truly learned a lot about the game’s inner workings over the course of their playthrough. a great rpg is balanced by the player’s knowledge of the game, and a great action game is balanced by the player’s muscle memory of the game, but despite these goals seeming completely adverse to each other, kh2 really manages to combine both into a package that i’m confident would please any fan of either genre. i’m not sure how true this would be on the other difficulties, since critical felt almost exactly perfectly balanced to me, but the good side of this is that the combat fundamentals in kh2 are enjoyable enough on their own that you could really just combo trash mobs for a few hours and have fun. there’s still some fights i think are poorly handled (the final boss being by far the worst fight in the game seems to be a kingdom hearts tradition at this point), but when 95% of the game is THIS fun, i really cannot complain. outside of the combat, i’d still say kh2 is an improvement on the original game, but a more marginal one. gimmick sections don’t run as long and control much better than in kh1, but i wouldn’t really say they’re a highlight. navigating worlds is much less obnoxious because of the increased linearity, but this does come with the trade off of many of these areas feeling like themed hallways. i could see people being turned off by just how direct this game is about what it needs you to do, but honestly, i don’t play these games for environmental gimmicks or platforming, so it just doesn’t bother me. the tighter level design also comes with the benefit of creating more controlled pacing for each world without making each world feel rushed or lacking in content. enemy variety is also very good for the majority of the game, though i did feel that enemies reliant on zoning (mages, snipers) didn’t feel as different from other heartless/nobodies as those enemy types did in kh1. these are very small nitpicks though, the majority of my time in KH2FMCM was an absolute blast.

when it comes to storytelling, i’d also say KH2 is mostly an improvement on KH1, though maybe a little less focused than CoM. the concept of nobodies is a really interesting one, but i think they were either written in a contradictory manner by accident, or the narrative is just unwilling to interrogate their existence. we’re told nobodies are essentially monsters imitating the appearance of humanity, but with the information we get within the narrative, that simply can’t be true. we see time and time again that nobodies are capable of feeling emotion, and are very capable of having human flaws; in everything but name they really may as well be humans, and xemnas makes a fairly strong argument when he questions why sora even cares. sora has a personal connection to the events, sure, but he isn’t aware of that until very late into the story anyways. the organization’s goals are, in my opinion, deeply sympathetic. we know from playing as roxas for the intro how unfair their nonexistence is, we can tell that they’re “real” people in many ways, we see several of them get actual development. it’s strange, because i can’t really tell what they’re trying to get across. if nobodies are really emotionless zombies filled with malice, why go through the effort to make us care about roxas and axel? if they’re human in all but name, why have sora spend the plot trying to kill them mostly just because he was told to by some old wizard? the meaning to sora’s narrative is similarly confusing to me; considering KH1 and CoM were such strongly focused around the development of their main characters, it felt odd to me that I couldn’t really think of a definitive statement KH2 was trying to make when it came to sora. is it about self-acceptance? is it about sora conquering nihilism? i really couldn’t tell you. on the bright side, the disney worlds are far more interesting, and the hints at a greater lore are all really cool. just wish it felt more coherent as a single story.