All comments

actually looking forward to playing this.. even though i dont care for turn based RPGS, this one looks like it could offer something different. Has some personality about it too.

As shame it will no doubt be over looked due to the timing of its release.

Valkyria Chronicles will be coming out next week, I'm still finishing up Disgaea 3 and Eternal Sonata, then there's Mirror's Edge and World Tour... Ugh. On the plus side, Square's last effort (Infinite Undiscovery) sucked ass, so here's hoping this one does too. Just one less purchase for me to worry about =P

IU was developed by Tri-Ace, Square-Enix only published the game.

Sexy, do want. But not if this framerate stays.

I was so mad when I saw that awful framerate T_T

Square+s devs got lazy :/

Too busy with Fallout 3 to really give a rats ass. Still have to buy Fable 2, Gears 2 and Mirrors Edge.....too many great games. They should have delayed it until things calm down.

You mean until after you spent all your money on the other games?

I think there would be more truth to claiming that they never were THAT good to begin with. Sure they know how to pull off flashy magic effects and how to make character face polycounts a high priority but i've never seen anything from square that made my jaw drop in the same way that, for example, Gears of War did.

funny...check unreal tournament on ps2 and check ffxii... Actually the final battle in ffxii is easily one of the most graphically impressive scenes I have ever seen...

Catfish: you do realize that UT is 7 years older than FFXII, right? Or are you really so stupid as to think that two games with 7 years in between are comparable? Why don't you try to compare it with God of War 2 or something and see how it stands out.

Or even more interesting, how did square games look in 1999? Well like this:
http://psxmedia.ign.com/media/previews2/image/threadsoffate/threads_7.jpg
http://psxmedia.ign.com/media/previews/image/ffviiius/3.jpg

I'm not saying that square are bad (actually, yes they are but that's beside the point and not graphics related), what i'm saying is that they never were so mega super ultra awesome in the gfx department as some people seem to think. Just look at FFXIII: awesome characters but the environments look like they were constructed with duplo blocks, and by the time it comes out all games will look like that.

hum... do I only imagine that or does the main char really have quite an ugly overbite (kinda like Ronaldinho) ?

Megido do shut up :)

SE isn't so much about graphics as artisticness, although it is amusing that you put FF8 up as a poster boy for bad graphics yet it was probably one of the best games for visuals on the PS1.

You are probably right that SE may not have been that great to begin with but they brough JRPGs to the west and thats all that matters. (nobody said they had to be the best of anything)

You mention Gears, yea it looks great graphically but artisically it looks like crap, but from what I can tell FF13 will have both, each to his own ey ?

Jolli: Square makes great Jrpgs so if you are in to that kind of stuff they are great. And i only brought up Threads of Fate and FF8 as a comparison to Unreal Tournament, because they were released in the same year and catfish needed to get his shit straight.

I really don't agree that Gears looks bad from an aesthetic point of view as the environments are gorgeous. The characters suck donkey ass tough, they really do.

All i'm saying is that square never were at the forefront of technically amazing games. They always made solid games with good presentation though. And FFXII looks great it's just that in the screens we've seen so far the characters look sweet but the backgrounds seem kind of "meh" in terms of detail.

Ummmm but UT was a PC game and FF8 was a PS1 game they are in no way comparable because of platform differences.

Jolli: so a game from 7 years later on hardware that whips a 1999 high end PC is a better comparison? ;) The comparison with UT and FFXII was retarded to begin with, i tried to illustrate said retardation and point to that at the time, when UT was released it didn't look bad at all. Especially compared to console games and what square was doing. I did actually write that FFXII should perhaps be compared to games like God of War 2 and other great looking titles from the same year rather than the old and dated UT.

Oh I agree ... Perhaps he meant UT2 :S

The frame rate seems to be a bit inconsistent.
The animations in the cut scenes are nicely done and overall the game is looking good. Really looking forward to this one.

you are pretty slow...I was talking about unreal tournament for PS2... the same hardware as ffxii...its epics only effort on ps2 I think, and it looks pretty poor next ffxii is all I am saying... regardless of timescale> So yeah, you are a bit slow on the uptake...


Also, I thought UT looked unimpressive when released on pc, while I thought ffviii looked fantastic.... Outcast on pc, now that was graphically ahead of both

UT on the PS2 is a port of the PC version and so of course the will look alike. Also compare release titles on the PS2 to the last couple of games on the system and you'll see a huge difference so the time scope is very much so important. If we are going to ignore time inbetween releases why don't we start bitching about how warcraft 2 looks like ass compared to FarCry 2, they are both available on the pc, right? Now if you could forget that asinine comparison we can move on from this.

And how the fuck do you manage to twist this into me thinking UT is the most awesome looking game ever? I just said that square never was the #1 in the graphics department. Sheesh.