Chrono Cross is sucking

[Daria]

jesus christ never did i imagine the hate this game could generate, i actually have it but never played more than 5 minutes of it, so i cant comment, but i was under the impression that this was one of the greatest jrpgs ever made, i thought ppl loved this game, i remember it getting rave reviews when it was released....um i think???

Funny. I was under the impression that the game was a universal disapointment.

[carlcarlson]

Funny. I was under the impression that the game was a universal disapointment.

Gamespot gave it a perfect 10. I'd say that's pretty good.

[James8BitStar]

Gamespot gave it a perfect 10. I'd say that's pretty good.

Until you realize that sites like Gamespot would never diss a major release from a company as big as Square...

[EX-Soldier]

so basically the general consensus is....the game sucks balls, while we're on the topic of ball sucking goodness i wanna add xenogears to that list, when the fuck is this game going to pick up? this mind-numbing wackness better pay off soon or its back to hello kitty island adventures for me (im in the mines under the desert after it collapses with that one-eyed pirate guy btw)

[James8BitStar]

so basically the general consensus is....the game sucks balls, while we're on the topic of ball sucking goodness i wanna add xenogears to that list, when the fuck is this game going to pick up? this mind-numbing wackness better pay off soon or its back to hello kitty island adventures for me (im in the mines under the desert after it collapses with that one-eyed pirate guy btw)

Back in the day I loved Xenogears, but I tried to play it again six months ago and I couldn't stand it.

Though honestly I think the last Square game I could go all the way through was Final Fantasy VII. Not that it was particularly great, its just that FF7 was the beginning of Square's decline.

Square's PS1 games were basically the gaming equivalent of a Peter Jackson film--needlessly drawn out, and filled to the brim with prettyness and artsyness and pretentious attempts at depth, but utterly lacking in worthwhile content and totally unable to tell a story that anyone outside of self-aggrandizing pseudointellectuals who think analyzing a game makes them look smart would care about.

Xenogears at least has good music and breaks from the "Its like Alone in the Dark but with random battles" style of gameplay.

[TonyTheTiger]

Humor me.

You have to be kidding.

[Poofta!]

You have to be kidding.

im gonna have to agree with daria on this one. as both rpg collectors...
there are over 100 PS1 rpgs. many godawful but most are great. chrono cross definitely falls into the bottom 50% if not lower.


as for square ps1 rpgs, id say it was 50/50 as far as boring/drawn out vs great. ok maybe 65/35....

[gum_drops]

but i was under the impression that this was one of the greatest jrpgs ever made, i thought ppl loved this game, i remember it getting rave reviews when it was released....um i think???

I have not played it either but it was comments like these that really hyped it up back in 2000.

"Chrono Cross is a truly epic role-playing game experience that has cemented its place in the annals of RPG history." - ign.com

"In Chrono Cross, Square has created a game that is every inch the equal of its predecessor and the perfect complement to it" - ign.com

[TonyTheTiger]

im gonna have to agree with daria on this one. as both rpg collectors...
there are over 100 PS1 rpgs. many godawful but most are great. chrono cross definitely falls into the bottom 50% if not lower.


as for square ps1 rpgs, id say it was 50/50 as far as boring/drawn out vs great. ok maybe 65/35....

But for God's sake, issuing a challenge like that...over something I could very easily lie about regardless...is just pretty stupid. I'm not going to pretend I've played OMG EVERY GAME! Hell, if I did then that would make me a sad person. But I've played a large number. In fact, of all the RPGs I've played most were on the Playstation (and I don't think there are over 100 in the U.S.). And I found CC to be pretty enjoyable despite the list of flaws. And, as I read through, of all the posts in here, mine is the most specific as far as listing out the flaws. So I don't see what the big deal is. Now I have to provide a list of games to justify why I enjoy one in particular?

[EX-Soldier]

But for God's sake, issuing a challenge like that...over something I could very easily lie about regardless...is just pretty stupid. I'm not going to pretend I've played OMG EVERY GAME! Hell, if I did then that would make me a sad person. But I've played a large number. In fact, of all the RPGs I've played most were on the Playstation (and I don't think there are over 100 in the U.S.). And I found CC to be pretty enjoyable despite the list of flaws. And, as I read through, of all the posts in here, mine is the most specific as far as listing out the flaws. So I don't see what the big deal is. Now I have to provide a list of games to justify why I enjoy one in particular?

DO IT!!!!!!

[16bitter]

Man, I wish I'd seen this a few days ago. I snagged a Playstation (my first one believe it or not) on ebay for ten bucks. I wanted to get a great RPG and ordered Chrono Cross. I never played Chrono Trigger, but I hear it was amazing, so I thought CC should be just as good.

The game hasn't arrived yet, but I'm already dreading putting it in.

[blissfulnoise]

I liked Chrono Cross. A lot actually. But I absolutely adore RPGs that feature huge casts of characters with lots of strange abilities (see: Suikoden). But I'm more of a loot/grind/power-up fan than I am a story driven one and on that front, CC delivered. That said, some games with exceptional stories or characters that resonate with me will break through (Eternal Sonata's wacky premise was a recent example of this, as was Xenogears over the top story).

I played and enjoyed Chrono Trigger when it was released on the SNES but I never developed a real attachment to the game on the level you see all over the intarwebs now.

Regardless, I doubt too many people would be "disappointed" in playing Chrono Cross for the first time now, especially if they don't have a deep emotional investment in the paragon known as Chrono Trigger.

[carlcarlson]

The game hasn't arrived yet, but I'm already dreading putting it in.

Well no offense, but that's kind of dumb. Deciding not to like a game before you've even played it makes no sense. I'd say do yourself a favor and actually play it before making up your mind, but I think your mind is already set.

[Press_Start]

But for God's sake, issuing a challenge like that...over something I could very easily lie about regardless...is just pretty stupid. I'm not going to pretend I've played OMG EVERY GAME! Hell, if I did then that would make me a sad person. But I've played a large number. In fact, of all the RPGs I've played most were on the Playstation (and I don't think there are over 100 in the U.S.). And I found CC to be pretty enjoyable despite the list of flaws. And, as I read through, of all the posts in here, mine is the most specific as far as listing out the flaws. So I don't see what the big deal is. Now I have to provide a list of games to justify why I enjoy one in particular?

My theory on Chrono Cross is that Square wanted a "one-of-a-kind" successor to Chrono Trigger with complex storyline, memorable characters, and "unique" battle system as the aforementioned. Instead traveling within one timeline, we jump between two timelines with the same time period as another aspect of the space-time continuum to explore. It all looked good on paper but two things really set the game back:

1. The battle system was confusing. I'll give respect to Square for trying something new, but who ever was in charge of the battle system didn't get the memo to come back down to earth. Half the time, I haven't gotten a clue and with over 30 characters to keep track, it was too much to take in. I'm sure pure hardcore RPG fans would love the challenge but it was a real turnoff for everyone else.

2. Story/variety or lack thereof. The concept in traveling between two parallel timelines was a fascinating concept. I was expecting the two to be different as night and day, in CC's case, its day and day after 1 hour. There was hardly any difference (besides characters) between the two from an overworld perspective and felt Square got lazy. The story itself was lackluster as it couldn't hold our attention or give us a hard grasp on what's going on.

I've played the game up to the part when you transform back from Lynx. After that, school got in the way and didn't think about it since.

[SARCASM]

Back in the day I loved Xenogears, but I tried to play it again six months ago and I couldn't stand it.

Is today Hate Squaresoft Day?

Square's PS1 games were basically the gaming equivalent of a Peter Jackson film--needlessly drawn out,

Oh yes, cause paying $50 and beating it within the same hour is a sign that I got my money's worth.

filled to the brim with prettyness and artsyness

Are we talking about Hello Kitty? Cause I've always described her as full of prettyness and artsyness!

Or was it hentai?

pretentious attempts at depth

That's what my cardboard cutout friends said after we had a round of flat soda and stale donuts. (Couldn't help but note, one of them was flat-chested.)

utterly lacking in worthwhile content and totally unable to tell a story that

It has been medically proven that ignorance has caused temporary blindness and loss of hearing resulting in blockage of information to the brain. As a defense mechanism, the brain fills the void with the substance called nonsense provided by the ego as it sees fit.

anyone outside of self-aggrandizing pseudointellectuals who think analyzing a game makes them look smart would care about.

Psst. Stop talking to the mirror.

Though honestly I think the last Square game I could go all the way through was Final Fantasy VII. Not that it was particularly great, its just that FF7 was the beginning of Square's decline.

[/SARCASM]

Sarcasm aside. Square's stories, art, and concept are interesting, captivating, and mesmerizing. Back then, always felt I got my money's worth when I bought one of their games.

Nowadays, people was so bent on getting what they want as soon as possible, they often forget that the best stuff are the ones worth waiting for. Whether it be in video games, or in life.

My two cents.

[Kid Fenris]

I liked Chrono Cross. A lot actually. But I absolutely adore RPGs that feature huge casts of characters with lots of strange abilities (see: Suikoden). But I'm more of a loot/grind/power-up fan than I am a story driven one and on that front, CC delivered. That said, some games with exceptional stories or characters that resonate with me will break through (Eternal Sonata's wacky premise was a recent example of this, as was Xenogears over the top story).

I played and enjoyed Chrono Trigger when it was released on the SNES but I never developed a real attachment to the game on the level you see all over the intarwebs now.

Regardless, I doubt too many people would be "disappointed" in playing Chrono Cross for the first time now, especially if they don't have a deep emotional investment in the paragon known as Chrono Trigger.

I'm sorry, Blissfulnoise, but no one here is going to take your opinion seriously unless you can provide a list of every RPG you've ever played, annotated with photographic evidence and the testimonies of two eyewitnesses for each title.

[TonyTheTiger]

My theory on Chrono Cross is that Square wanted a "one-of-a-kind" successor to Chrono Trigger with complex storyline, memorable characters, and "unique" battle system as the aforementioned. Instead traveling within one timeline, we jump between two timelines with the same time period as another aspect of the space-time continuum to explore. It all looked good on paper but two things really set the game back:

1. The battle system was confusing. I'll give respect to Square for trying something new, but who ever was in charge of the battle system didn't get the memo to come back down to earth. Half the time, I haven't gotten a clue and with over 30 characters to keep track, it was too much to take in. I'm sure pure hardcore RPG fans would love the challenge but it was a real turnoff for everyone else.

I can see where someone would find the element system cumbersome. It does take more time to allocate a selection to a character where the outcome is to your liking. But the bright side is that the game is not particularly difficult so even if you pick the auto option and let the game do it for you you'll more than likely have enough variety of elements to handle 90% of the battles. The rest of the time it's mostly just obvious stuff. If you're walking into the Red Dragon boss fight you'll probably want a lot of blue elements.

2. Story/variety or lack thereof. The concept in traveling between two parallel timelines was a fascinating concept. I was expecting the two to be different as night and day, in CC's case, its day and day after 1 hour. There was hardly any difference (besides characters) between the two from an overworld perspective and felt Square got lazy. The story itself was lackluster as it couldn't hold our attention or give us a hard grasp on what's going on.

I didn't much mind the similarity between the worlds. It wasn't like World of Balance/World of Ruin or Light World/Dark World type of overt difference but the angle I think the game was going for was essentially the Butterfly Effect. That one slight change causes a multitude of other slight changes.

[G-Boobie]

Sarcasm aside. Square's stories, art, and concept are interesting, captivating, and mesmerizing. Back then, always felt I got my money's worth when I bought one of their games.

Nowadays, people was so bent on getting what they want as soon as possible, they often forget that the best stuff are the ones worth waiting for. Whether it be in video games, or in life.

My two cents.

... First off, your responses to James8's opinion makes you look like an incredible fucking twat. They're his opinions, troll-boy; he wasn't attacking you. If you don't like it, go back to fucking GameFAQs. We don't need that kind of abuse here.

Secondly, here's MY opinion: Square Enix RPG's, from the Playstation era forward, have been pretentious, poorly written, overly complicated and unevenly designed. Oftentimes the actual mechanics of the game will make up for it though: Vagrant Story, Final Fantasy Tactics, and Parasite Eve for example.

Let me be clear: absolutely none of the Square RPG stories have ever been anything other than 'acceptable and fun'. Then again, I've read actual books, so that might be my problem. And if you don't like spiky hair and zippers, then the art design is often lacking too.

No game, without exception, is worth ANYTHING if the actual act of playing the game, the nuts and bolts, the mechanics, are lacking. Chrono Cross, for me, fails in that regard. If it doesn't start rewarding me for playing within a short while of booting up, then fuck it: there are games that don't require me to slog through tedious bullshit before being fun. That isn't to say that I'm condemning Chrono Cross wholesale; if it works for you, great. I played it once, primarily for the music, and will never touch it again.

[Press_Start]

... First off, your responses to James8's opinion makes you look like an incredible fucking twat. They're his opinions, troll-boy; he wasn't attacking you. If you don't like it, go back to fucking GameFAQs. We don't need that kind of abuse here.

First off, James8's comment was an insult (the same way you're calling me a troll) by stating that ANYONE who remotely likes Square's RPG games should be called a jerk.

I felt insulted by it and disagreed with him by responding with sarcasm.

Secondly, here's MY opinion: Square Enix RPG's, from the Playstation era forward, have been pretentious, poorly written, overly complicated and unevenly designed. Oftentimes the actual mechanics of the game will make up for it though: Vagrant Story, Final Fantasy Tactics, and Parasite Eve for example.

Let me be clear: absolutely none of the Square RPG stories have ever been anything other than 'acceptable and fun'. Then again, I've read actual books, so that might be my problem. And if you don't like spiky hair and zippers, then the art design is often lacking too.

I'll give you that. Wasn't too thrilled with many of the mechanics with FF8 (i.e. card game, weapon system, money given within intervals?). After that, their games lacked substance with the exception of a few.

[Sudo]

... First off, your responses to James8's opinion makes you look like an incredible fucking twat. They're his opinions, troll-boy; he wasn't attacking you. If you don't like it, go back to fucking GameFAQs. We don't need that kind of abuse here.

Secondly, here's MY opinion: Square Enix RPG's, from the Playstation era forward, have been pretentious, poorly written, overly complicated and unevenly designed. Oftentimes the actual mechanics of the game will make up for it though: Vagrant Story, Final Fantasy Tactics, and Parasite Eve for example.

Let me be clear: absolutely none of the Square RPG stories have ever been anything other than 'acceptable and fun'. Then again, I've read actual books, so that might be my problem. And if you don't like spiky hair and zippers, then the art design is often lacking too.

No game, without exception, is worth ANYTHING if the actual act of playing the game, the nuts and bolts, the mechanics, are lacking. Chrono Cross, for me, fails in that regard. If it doesn't start rewarding me for playing within a short while of booting up, then fuck it: there are games that don't require me to slog through tedious bullshit before being fun. That isn't to say that I'm condemning Chrono Cross wholesale; if it works for you, great. I played it once, primarily for the music, and will never touch it again.

Xenogears is one of Square's best games and features neither spiky hair nor ziippers. The story is excellent also, IMO.

[James8BitStar]

Is today Hate Squaresoft Day?

Nope, that was yesterday. If you wanted a hat, too bad.

Oh yes, cause paying $50 and beating it within the same hour is a sign that I got my money's worth.

Wow, I think you just zinged Contra's entire fanbase.

Are we talking about Hello Kitty? Cause I've always described her as full of prettyness and artsyness!

Or was it hentai?

Pedophilia and beastiality in one package? The horrors never cease!

That's what my cardboard cutout friends said after we had a round of flat soda and stale donuts. (Couldn't help but note, one of them was flat-chested.)

That one wasn't you, was it?

Oh wait, you're flat-brained. My mistake.

It has been medically proven that ignorance has caused temporary blindness and loss of hearing resulting in blockage of information to the brain. As a defense mechanism, the brain fills the void with the substance called nonsense provided by the ego as it sees fit.

An analysis worthy of Dr. House... an old, crooked-legged Dr. House who lived on life support and had gone senile years before.

Sarcasm aside. Square's stories, art, and concept are interesting, captivating, and mesmerizing.

... Every once in awhile.

Back then, always felt I got my money's worth when I bought one of their games.

even Rad Racer?

Nowadays, people was so bent on getting what they want as soon as possible, they often forget that the best stuff are the ones worth waiting for. Whether it be in video games, or in life.

Oh, I see. If you don't like Square, you must be a hyperactive ADD kid. It doesn't matter if you're an avid adventure gamer or if you play and enjoy non-Square RPGs. If you don't like Square, you just have no patience. Simple!

By the way... "people was"?

First off, James8's comment was an insult (the same way you're calling me a troll) by stating that ANYONE who remotely likes Square's RPG games should be called a jerk.

Except that I don't actually say that.