Worst PS1 RPGs

[Little Miss Gloom]

Lunar 1 and Lunar 2.

...

What?

[Alpha2099]

Lunar 1 and Lunar 2.

...

What?

I was about to call blasphemy, until I remember that I only made it about halfway through Lunar 1. Not that I thought it was bad, but I lost interest.

[Haoie]

Nobody's mentioned Alundra II?

[bb_hood]

Personally I think both Lunar games are pretty horrible

[Jorpho]

Take said magazine to a particular weapon shop. And not just ANY random shop cause....
Said shop has to "decipher" said magazine to make said weapon available then gives list of items necessary to make said weapon.

I don't remember that at all...

And said weapon only deals 300-400 points of damage in battle. What....a....rip.

Don't you need them principally to get new limit breaks for Squall?

[BlastProcessing402]

FF8 was also the start of the whole "leather" thing in the series.

Anyway, I'll go with Shadow Madness, I can't believe I was looking forward to that POS.

[FrankSerpico]

Personally I think both Lunar games are pretty horrible
It's really just a generic JRPG, but considering the time they came out they compare pretty well with other JRPGs of the era. I always thought WD pulled off a helluva coup by convincing so many people to pay almost 90 bucks for the re-release, though. I was 15 or 16 at the time of the re-release, and the only person I knew who ended up getting it non-used was this awful basement dwelling weeabo whose parents bought him anything he asked for.

[Daria]

Anyway, I'll go with Shadow Madness, I can't believe I was looking forward to that POS.

The first two games I ever owned for the PSOne were Shadow Madness and Star Ocean 2. First time I tried SM I wrote it off as the ugliest POS I'd ever played. Later I gave it a second chance, and while it was still ugly and I realized a blatent Final Fantasy ripoff to boot I also came to appreciate the game's script. Now I consider it one of my favorite games for the system. If not technically good, it's at least funny and well written. More than can be said for a lot of the games of that era.

As far as the worst RPG is concerned, I really REALLY didn't like Legend of Legaia. But honestly the game's not so much bad as it's just terribly mediocre. I think that's the real problem with the PSOne's library- there are so many great RPGs available that the bland ones just don't compare.

[Aussie2B]

Personally I think both Lunar games are pretty horrible
It's really just a generic JRPG, but considering the time they came out they compare pretty well with other JRPGs of the era. I always thought WD pulled off a helluva coup by convincing so many people to pay almost 90 bucks for the re-release, though. I was 15 or 16 at the time of the re-release, and the only person I knew who ended up getting it non-used was this awful basement dwelling weeabo whose parents bought him anything he asked for.

90 bucks? o_O If any store was charging that, then they were majorly gouging. The MSRP was $60, which was still $20 more than the average PlayStation RPG back then, but for all the extra goodies (and the fact that I was spending that much on N64 games already, without any extras), it seemed fair enough to me.

Maybe you're thinking of the Arc the Lad Collection? I'm pretty sure that was more expensive yet, although still not close to $90.

[Press_Start]

It's really just a generic JRPG, but considering the time they came out they compare pretty well with other JRPGs of the era. I always thought WD pulled off a helluva coup by convincing so many people to pay almost 90 bucks for the re-release, though. I was 15 or 16 at the time of the re-release, and the only person I knew who ended up getting it non-used was this awful basement dwelling weeabo whose parents bought him anything he asked for.

Calling Lunar a generic JRPG is like calling Superman a guy in colorful tight or calling Walking Dead just a TV show about zombies or Helen's famous sausages are......well, sausages. It's shallow, thoughtless, short-sighted, flat and ignores all the best qualities of the game: innovative/original battle system, rich n' endearing characters in a gripping fantastic heroic story in a exotic land delivering the best animation for its time with a top-notch cast n' crew to match. Basically, it's the perfect standard what every generic JRPG should be striving for, not something to be lumped with them.

[Daria]

Calling Lunar a generic JRPG is... shallow, thoughtless, short-sighted, flat and ignores all the best qualities of the game: innovative/original battle system, rich n' endearing characters in a gripping fantastic heroic story in a exotic land delivering the best animation for its time with a top-notch cast n' crew to match. Basically, it's the perfect standard what every generic JRPG should be striving for, not something to be lumped with them.

This.

I also have to wonder, if Lunar's just another generic RPG to you what do you consider your classics to be?

[Terminusvitae]

I actually really enjoyed FF7 and just replayed it a few months ago. It's far from perfect, but what game isn't?

As for the topic's question, I'd have to second either <i>The Granstream Saga</i> or <i>Alundra 2</i>.

[FrankSerpico]

Don't get me wrong, I have Silver Star Story for my Sega CD and I played through it and really enjoyed it. I have yet to get ahold of Eternal Blue, but I know many consider it to be better than its predecessor. I just don't think Silver Star Story belongs in that elite category with games like FF6 or FF Tactics, and I can certainly see why someone who's first exposure to the game was the re-release wouldn't be all that impressed. I think a lot of the lore surrounding the game has to do with it coming out in an era where fans on this side of the pond were starved for JRPGs but idiotic publishers claimed we only wanted Madden and Mortal Kombat.

[kupomogli]

Maybe you're thinking of the Arc the Lad Collection? I'm pretty sure that was more expensive yet, although still not close to $90.

Arc the Lad Collection was $79.99 at launch, kind of close, but yeah, still not $90.

innovative/original battle system

Your characters move in battle!? INNOVATION!! Other than using Flee to back away from an enemy so you force them to move up to you, there's really no difference in the way this plays from a standard JRPG battle system. It's really not that innovative, but hey, who am I to say you can't further overrate the game for almost no reason at all.

Anyways. The Lunar games are far from the worst RPGs ever released as they're decent, but they're some of the more overrated RPGs in the genre. It's similar to Earthbound how it receives massive praise for being an extremely generic RPG and while the Lunar games are much better than Earthbound, they're not on the level the fanbase praises them.

From FrankSerpico's original Lunar post and then his most recent post, it doesn't sound like he's saying it's the worst game ever made. Sounds like he was replying to the earlier Lunar comments that it's a good series that's extremely overrated.

[Daria]

Your characters move in battle!? INNOVATION!! Other than using Flee to back away from an enemy so you force them to move up to you, there's really no difference in the way this plays from a standard JRPG battle system. It's really not that innovative, but hey, who am I to say you can't further overrate the game for almost no reason at all.

Actually the PSOne Lunars implement one of my favorite battle mechanics- the ability to see and circumnavigate the enemies in the dungeons. Granted I don't know who originated the concept, and you may not actually fight any less mobs than in a traditional random battle format, but you FEEL better about it. Nothing's more frustrating/nerve wracking than the suddeness of "step, step, FIGHT!" at least Lunar made you feel like you had some control over when and where each battle occurred.

[FrankSerpico]

I certainly wasn't trying to say that Lunar is anywhere near one of the worst RPGs ever made. In fact, I'd say most of the traditional nominees for worst PS1 rpg like Shadow Madness, Beyond the Beyond etc. are still leaps and bounds ahead of the worst examples of the genre on 16-bit systems. I will forever loathe Shining in the Darkness even though I'm a huge Sega fan and can appreciate some of its innovative qualities, and 7th Saga was one of the most hateable games I've ever tried to slog through.

[Aussie2B]

Hell must've frozen over because I have to agree with kupomogli in that Lunar's battle system isn't particularly innovative or original. Not that that's necessarily a bad thing. It's pretty much your classic turn-based Japanese RPG battle system.

I like Lunar all right. There are some things I don't care for about it and it didn't leave a huge impact on me, but it's still enjoyable enough overall.

[Edmond Dantes]

Eh, I'd prefer a traditional battle system over some of the more esoteric crap some of Square-Enix forces us to put up with.

I'll admit that if judged on how innovative it is yeah Lunar isn't that good (this is actually why I didn't like the Sega CD ones initially) but once you get past that, it's almost comparable to Chrono Trigger--nothing new, but everything done right.

[PizzaKat]

I loved Final Fantasy VIIIs card game (triple triad?) I actually started a new game to get all the rare cards. O f course I had to go to city to city and ask a specific dealer and answer specific questions I think. Didnt have much games back then. I loved the story and the fact there were just humans. The only annoying part was drawing spells from enemies and calling the special monsters (I forgot their names) went into that long production. Its cool but I just wanna get over with it.
I dont know if its my skill but I had to level up right away in Lunar as the enemies were extremely powerful.

[Press_Start]

Don't get me wrong, I have Silver Star Story for my Sega CD and I played through it and really enjoyed it. I have yet to get ahold of Eternal Blue, but I know many consider it to be better than its predecessor. I just don't think Silver Star Story belongs in that elite category with games like FF6 or FF Tactics, and I can certainly see why someone who's first exposure to the game was the re-release wouldn't be all that impressed. I think a lot of the lore surrounding the game has to do with it coming out in an era where fans on this side of the pond were starved for JRPGs but idiotic publishers claimed we only wanted Madden and Mortal Kombat.

Here's a list of PS1 RPGs I played before Lunar: Vandal Hearts, FF7, Wild Arms, FF Tactics, Suikoden, Breath of Fire 3, Tales of Destiny, Xenogears, Parasite Eve, Brave Fencer Musashi, and never once did Lunar perform any less than any RPG I played past, present, or future. It stands with the best of them while bringing something to table all without the help of being part of an "elite category", which sounds incredibly snobbish n' very insecure giving out a strange vibe like you guys only play games just to feel superior to others, then again those who live in ivory towers do see everyone as ants.

Your characters move in battle!? INNOVATION!! Other than using Flee to back away from an enemy so you force them to move up to you, there's really no difference in the way this plays from a standard JRPG battle system. It's really not that innovative, but hey, who am I to say you can't further overrate the game for almost no reason at all.

Sorry, Lunar does have an innovative/original battle system with a fresh and nuanced approach in reinventing the classics by removing all the traps and trites of the old system, retooling and simplifying what works well at the same time redefining the rules of engagement in ingenious and clever ways in and outside of battle be in an open field that felt like a chess board that will satisfy veteran and new players alike giving the them freedom to try strategies and possibilities rarely before seen in RPGs and holds enough familiarity that players won't get lost like say in FF8. It's everything new and old at the same time with a significant degree of success.

Anyways. The Lunar games are far from the worst RPGs ever released as they're decent, but they're some of the more overrated RPGs in the genre. It's similar to Earthbound how it receives massive praise for being an extremely generic RPG and while the Lunar games are much better than Earthbound, they're not on the level the fanbase praises them.

I hate to sound like a broken record but that was shallow, thoughtless, short-sighted, and flat....on top of that, I would like to add: narrow-minded, antagonizing, selfishly ignorant, downright hateful and void of any n' all matter of substance to back up whatsoever. It's somebody else's dam opinion in your regurgitated pseudo-intellectual venomous stew.