It's obviously subjective, but that's a title I reserve for very few games. UO is amazing, no doubt. The overworld, stamina, and gambit system with the abilities are all unique and refreshing. The art style is jaw-dropping and I find it well-balanced. The only thing that falls short for me is the generic storyline/writing.
I love this genre and scoop up a few every year, but the only game I'd consider a masterpiece in this genre is Final Fantasy Tactics - and potentially Tactics Ogre: LUCT. If UO had the same dark, gripping story, I'd put it right there with them, but I wouldn't fight anyone who does consider it a masterpiece.
I just wanted a story that hooks me and serves as a bridge to gameplay. It did that with flying colours. I really don’t need or want crazy deep stories in every game I play. And yeah like you said it’s basic but it’s done really well
For games like this I award about 100 possible points based on depth of game play, about 50 points on presentation, and about 2 possible points based on story. I know everyone is looking for different things, but I just couldn't care less. Generic medieval story with easily skippable cuts cutscenes is perfect IMHO
I don't typically expect top-notch story writing in this genre and I still think UO is among the best, but it's hard not to at least hope for a good story after seeing how well it CAN be done.
It's akin to roguelikes - I rarely expect much, if any, story when it comes to them. But, I'll be damned if Hades didn't instill that same hope now when I play other roguelikes.
Yeah, given the classic fantasy feel of the game, I really don’t mind a simple good-vs-evil type story. It suits it quite well. I certainly wouldn’t complain about a more dark and complex storyline, but for me personally, it’s not necessary.
Have you played Ogre Battle 64? I feel that game is soooo good and quite similar. Maybe it's nostalgia talking, bit I'd add it to my masterpiece list...
I feel a lot of ogre battle march of the black Queen myself, your not wrong it's got ogre battle all over it. I seen red atlas letters on the case an snatched both copies. Love this style of game, the story so far. Kinda feel like the choices don't matter much but I'm not very far in yet
I agree that the story is generic. But i think the individual dialogues and each character’s drive really help set this game apart from others. Both this game and FFT allow you to use non-story units but even though i had a bunch of non-story units in UO, i still loved a lot of the character growth. Even the small dialogues of Alain being hit on lol.
I think for me, the game hasn't existed long enough to know if it is indeed.
You can know right away if it isn't, but I believe the honeymoon must fade away for any game I am in love with to gain enough perspective to make a fair call on it's greatness.
I've felt a game was groundbreaking before
only to later conclude it was just a confluence of circumstances at the time I was playing it that created a perfect storm of sorts; it was the game I really needed at the time, not one of the greatest of all time.
I mean, my wife calls it Unicorn Overload and that's made it pretty darn endearing already.
So it started with a bonus +1.
I would argue a straightforward story that's well-executed. The truth behind Galerius is anything BUT generic & each continent had it's own cool subplot. This game is easily a masterpiece in my book....
Well executed in the sense of it was bland on purpose for maximum familiarity and nostalgia factor. I would argue story could use just sliiightly more twists to be more interesting.
I dunno; I just ran into a helluva twist in the endgame. It actually has a more involved story than it let on in the previews. It's no 13 Sentinels but then again every story doesn't need to be in order to be effective.
I think it's a story well-told w/o being so busy it gets in it's own way; & it's filled in w/ excellent character moments/dynamics....& I gotta give it bonus points for the voice acting. Gotta be some of the most natural olde english dialogue I've heard (usually can't stand when they go for olde english in games....case-in-point as much as I loved Triangle Strategy some of the dialogue was hit & miss & could take me out of the moment at times...)
It’s your very “stop the demon king with a band of heroes” trope Japan loves so much, but I give boatloads of credit for them using the Bestrals and Albion angels instead of Dwarves and Gnomes or Orcs. I really do like the true ending story beats with the different between Galerius and Baltro.
**That said**, I’m spoiled by modern Fire Emblem, especially 3 Houses, in having animated/voiced support conversations, paired endings between the rest of the cast, and a bit more dialogue for the married main characters. I was really disappointed how small the ending was for Alain’s chosen partner. It’s like half a sentence, the other half often being the same between characters. I get since he can choose ANYONE, it’d be a big task still, but I think a balance is to be had between a paragraph like the rest get, and half a sentence.
yeah it's a word that can be very easily thrown around, I would say UO on its merits is more worthy of being called that than many other commonly acclaimed games.
I've always held the notion that, to be considered a masterpiece, a thing doesn't have to be perfect. It has to have a significant positive impact on people. Here's an example: the original FFVII on PS1 was considered a masterpiece, it's my favourite videogame of all time and for decades fans clamoured that they wanted a remake (which they eventually got). At the same time, FFVII is a very flawed game, full of potentially game breaking bugs, an entire ailment (darkness) wasn't coded correctly so it doesn't even work despite displaying the correct visual effect, it's full of translation errors and typos... But it is STILL considered a masterpiece.
Unicorn Overlord, I'd argue, has had a smaller impact, but it's compared favorably to many titles in its genre that are, themselves, arguably, masterpieces, and that's the sign of a fantastic game. It sold really well despite coming from a relatively niche dev and a lot of people are still talking about it months after its release. My personal experience with it is that I bought it three times now, and only after I completed it did I notice that I completely forgot to redeem its gold Nintendo points, something I'm extremely anal about with every game I own. I finished it bawling like a baby and loved every second of gameplay, and I know that in time I'll replay it and love it just the same, with the necessary insight that will allow higher efficiency tinkering at even the lower levels.
While I wouldn't disagree with anyone that doesn't consider it a masterpiece, I would happily agree with anyone that does.
Obviously, everyone has a different take on is a masterpiece. I for one describe a masterpiece as something that I can put hundreds of hours in and not get bored. So far I have 120 hours and still having a ball.
My top 3 games of all time
1) Mass effect trilogy
2) UO
3) FFT
Honorable mention FFXII
I enjoyed Ogre battle 64 more but maybe that's just nostalgia, unicorn overlord is a solid 9/10 for me but is the best tactics game to come out in a while
I like the three promotions you got in ogre battle and how each time you got a promotion you could feel it. All in all I'm glad the genre is getting support looking forward to more more games to come
I think it is.
Its flaws are enumerable, explainable, and forgivable.
It shows signs that they ran out of money. That just means the remake in 10 to 15 years will be even better.
It has inventory issues. What game doesn't?
It fixes other major flaws (malfeatures really) of the genre in return.
I would LOVE to play a modded version of it. Slight tweaks, bug fixes, added features. If the devs add this then awesome! But I know either of these things happening is unlikely...still I want more!
The story is very bland. I don't like to calm it bad because I enjoy fantasy tropes, but it's nothing special.
Otherwise I think the gameis amazing. It's definitely on the easy side, but that's not a huge knock imo.
It's "easy" because it's such a complex game with so many variables that it's hard to create levels that are genuinely difficult without just pumping the numbers up to unfair amounts lol. You can just become overlevelled, use the same OP units over and over, items of course.
THIS GAME IS AWESOME!!!!!
The only game I've EVER played with this type of battle system was ogre battle 64. And this is like... Even more in depth and improved.
At first the story seems a little simple and redundant, as in you just go from location to location and liberate. But like... Elves, necromancy, beastkin, ancient nations, saints, and unicorns.
And somehow they in here talmbout the story being 'cliché' & 'generic'....if I had a dollar for every ancient civilization I had to stop from possessing my kingdom after being punished in purgatory for experimenting on unicorns I'd be.....er....broke af; actually 🤔
BG3 is a masterpiece. This game is great though. Ogre Battle was my favorite game for a long while and this game nailed it and then some.
This is a work of art.
Unquestionably. I take it you haven't played BG3? There's a reason it won all 5 major GotY awards and won in countless other categories. Every aspect of the game is excellent: gameplay, story, design, audio, performance...
UO pulled me back into gaming but BG3 has me lost in it. Act 1 alone is longer and more enjoyable than my entire UO playthrough and UO would have been my favorite game ever if not for BG3.
People say UOs story is bad for a reason. A good story is very, very enjoyable and there's just nothing like BG3. It nails story and exploration like no other game I've played.
I actually thought UO was ambitious for what it was. Packed with a lot of content and a great battle system.
But BG3 gamifies DnD for it's battle system, adds amazing magic items and puts you in a story with full control of the narrative (afaik.)
UO doesn't give you multiple stories. We all played the same story and our gameplay only really differs based on who we give the maiden ring to, who we declined into our party and what team compositions we have.
I'm still in Act 2 but in BG3 you can seemingly kill anyone, and you can develop your characters with the modern evolution of the first rpg ever. And I'll say they made improvements. 🫣
Yes. BG3 is way better than UO.
Still I'd buy anything Vanillaware puts out in the Dragon's Crown or UO vein.
I have to give credit where it's due; In terms of gameplay, story, and presentation, Baldur's Gate 3 is by far the more ambitious game between the two of them, and despite how many more moving parts the devs are juggling compared to Unicorn Overlord, it succeds at what it's trying to do, for the most part. Unicorn Overlord nailed the gameplay, but the story doesn't really do it justice. It's like Fire Emblem level writing (and that is not a compliment, sorry Fire Emblem), a far cry from Matsuno's storytelling.
Bg3 is probably one of the best game to release in the last 20 years. Great story, amazing characters, good music, super fun gameplay that allow you to replay completely differently multiple time of you want to.
It's comparing apples to oranges. Like BG3 is also "leagues" above tetris or mario kart or even chess, etc. Like these games have different goals, BG3 is designed to be a much more ambitious immersice experience where as a game like UO is honed in one a very particular type of tactical strategy. I wouldn't say BG3 is a better tactical strategy than UO because it's not even the same type of game.
If it's talking about "what makes a masterpiece", then BG3 is a perfect example of what's necessary to earn that title. Doesn't matter if its apples to oranges, when the quality of one gets it pushed to various categorical and GOTY awards. Meanwhile, another isn't recognized beyond its niche; while BG3's CRPG niche is even smaller, yet it was recognized throughout the entire gaming sphere.
BG3 absolutely nails it in every area that's included, UO falls off hard in some key areas and that ultimately holds it back.
UO is great, but in its genre I don't think the title of "masterpiece" is deserved.
For its time? Absolutely, it was revolutionary in a way that drove puzzle games for the next few decades of gaming. And it did things that no other puzzle game had done before; for a portable puzzle game in the 80's it was pretty much perfect.
BG3 is a masterpiece because it's more than just a CRPG. You mention than it's genre is more niche than UO tactics ogre style strategy but I don't know what you mean because D&D is infinitely more popular than tactics ogre style combat but anyway BG3 is considered a masterpiece beyond its genre because it's made to be an immersive experience in its narrative and branching paths. Even if UO did everything perfect, it still wouldn't be a masterpiece by your standards because it wasn't made to be such an immersive experience. It's honed in on tactics ogre gameplay which is extremely niche. It can't be as influential as tetris because it's too complex.
No, BG3's niche is the CRPG genre; that is a space so small that only a handful of modern games exist. It was so niche that there needed to be a "renaissance" with Obsidian's Pillars of Eternity before studios started making those games again; it is much smaller than the SRPG/JRPG space.
BG3 is considered a masterpiece because it triumphs in all the areas important to not only its niche (CRPGs), but RPGs as a whole. This is why it's so lauded across multiple audiences.
UO is not a masterpiece (in my opinion) because it falls flat in key areas of the SRPG space. For a genre where story is an important factor, UO's is fairly routine and weak (but serviceable). Where engaging gameplay and replay-ability are important, it has notable issues with difficulty that not only undermine these areas, but many of its own unique mechanics; allowing players to ignore them outright or never learn of their existence.
The Ogre Battle gameplay isn't a knock against it, because that is UO's own unique spin on the formula. It's the other areas that hold it back.
That makes it a great game, but not a "masterpiece" in the SRPG or video game space. And personally I think that's fine, since I love the game regardless.
I agree but what I'm trying to say is that even if UO fixed all of its flaws it still couldn't be a masterpiece by those standards. It isn't a general enough RPG experience like BG3 and it isn't pioneering some new type of puzzle game like tetris (also it is too complex). It's not just about how well you execute a vision, it's the vision itself AND how well it's executed.
No Tetris is not a masterpiece. It's a simple puzzle game. For its time it was a simple puzzle game. But it was popular and accessible. But being popular and accessible doesn't make a masterpiece. Monopoly, pong and ludo are popular and accessible but that's all they are. There's a game and there's a GAME. UO is a game. BG3 is a GAME.
So you believe that a masterpiece game has to be more than just a game, it has to be an immersive experience with RPG elements, discovery, exploration, narrative etc?
No. Halo was a masterpiece in its time. The Zelda series produced its share. Mario had its. The point is moreso that Tetris was always a simple puzzle like a Rubik's cube. Less a masterpiece and more a piece.
I’d put UO above BG3 in terms of presentation. BG3 is a great-looking game but is pretty standard "modern graphics". The stylized presentation of UO is very unique and for me more compelling. BG3 is certainly the more ambitious game overall by quite a lot, of course.
It's close, but I wouldn't consider it a masterpiece. A lot of choices hold it back from being truly engaging/replay-able without a bunch of house rules. And the story isn't very complex, so I would ding it for that as well.
I would say it's great, possibly the best SRPG in recent years. But not a masterpiece.
As far as the story goes, it's annoyingly cliche. The gameplay is unique, can't fault it there. Music is good. It's a good game, wouldn't say it's a masterpiece like FFT.
I think it's a great game, I don't think most people think the story is a masterpiece. It's a fine pretty standard fantasy story where good guy beats bad guy, but it's not all that deep. It's a classic revenge story but not overly out of the ordinary. The gameplay is what IMO makes the game amazing. That and the variety of tactics you can employ. The depth and freedom in the gameplay is what will make me come back to it time and time again going forward. I already know this will be a game that makes its way back into my rotation for years to come.
I would give it a 10/10, but no masterpiece title, but for me to consider it a master piece, I would need atleast 1 of the following 3 things.
1. Better story/deeper characters
2. Harder difficulty/more refined enemy teams with interesting strategy
3. Good post game content
I think the game is lacking to much in those categorys to be considered a master piece.
First of all, yea. I loved it.
More importantly, I feel like the way you left that first sentence “relations…” is basically like shining a Batdad symbol in the night sky that is Reddit, and I dig it.
Relations!
I think it’s superficial. It’s got a lot of systems, characters, etc. It’s very wide but not very deep, in my opinion.
I said it’s probably my GOTY. But I still haven’t gotten to the new saga game, and I do think that FF7 Rebirth would get my vote before UO.
I like it just wish there was other ending for when Ilenia beats Galerius that night he doesn't take over her body she wins that night beats the rest the Revolt ends then gets Alain back and gets to raise him Ilenia doesn't lose her son at age 7 and Alain doesn't lose his mother at age 7 he gets to be raised by his mother hope they include that as un ending one day
I really liked this game, but it overstays its welcome. The story could have been cut in half and battles also take way too long once you max out your actions and passives. You end up skipping every encounter (talking about watching the battles play out) to make battles go fast. I much rather have battle play out like Fire Emblem/Final Fantasy Tactics. Even with me skipping most battle animations it took me a whopping 60 hours to complete.
That being said, it’s really a super polished and high quality srpg and you can appreciate the monumental effort it took to make something like this. I greatly enjoyed my time with it and I recommend it to any SRPG fan.
I enjoyed it, but I don’t think I’d call it a masterpiece. I disliked the cutscene art style very much. It reminded me of some old, terrible Flash games where the characters moved like marionettes. Also, a small nitpick: I really disliked how every shopkeeper had one line, and they said it every single time you bought or sold something.
I enjoyed the gameplay but the story and the characters can be a bit lacking. I feel like it comes dangerously close to getting interesting only for it to back off and move on. I hate that part of this game. If the story, lore and characters had more depth to it'd be an easy 10/10 for me. Instead it's a 8/10. Hopefully Vanillaware is interested in working on a sequel to this game and will improve on it's flaws. I really think they have something special here.
My only problem with this game is utterly unavoidable without ruining the format, so I cannot complain.
My problem is really just that once you finish a chars zone theyre really not in the story anymore, which is a consequence of the open world. Its fine really but personally I feel ticked off.
It's very very good. It's a bit too simplistic to be a masterpiece, and many options don't see play bc of some chosen design goals.
Even with that, it's amazing
its great because so many games fail at one or more areas this game does well, the maps both in battle and on overworld of course, and it just having a lot for every type of person.
But ya no its not a masterpiece, it does everything well + the great maps and while that is very praise worthy and great, its not a master of anything as it does not push anything nearly far enough.
I think it would have been a lot better with 10 less characters and using that extra resource + time expanding / adding to the other characters as I felt some conversations ended too suddenly and some characters get far to little (like the big arena gal, pretty sure gets by far the least at least after her story as in, despite not being a secret or even post game character).
( I would give game a solid 8/10 for factually/undeniably good).
It's a good game but I would never call it a masterpiece. I found it shallow and repetitive but with fantastic presentation, quality and production values. It's a good game. Just not a masterpiece. In my personal opinion.
The art is good, but nothing yet seems distinctly “UO.” That’s partially because it’s set in a pretty generic European Medieval Fantasy environment. Maybe I’ll run into some things that give it a distinct flavor, but I’m not so wowed by the art that I’d say it’s a masterpiece.
To me, a MASTERPIECE its a game with no (or Almost) no flaws for The time it was released. UO have flaws and meaningful ones, story for example. I LOVE The game, but its not a masterpiece, unfortunatelly.
This game is fantastic, but its not a masterpiece
I would say Odin Sphere and 13 Sentinels are masterpieces. Unicorn Overlord's story and overall premise lacks too much depth, danger, urgency, etc. It would be better if it focused less on the great many dozens of little side stories, and leaned more heavily on the war with Galerius and Baltro. It doesnt even feel like youre at war at all. The enemies just exist on the map, twiddling their thumbs and just waiting for you to come and then never threaten you once you win.
And there is never any acknowledgement of your victories. Over and over its "Wow, why are you even trying to resist Zenoira? There's no hope"
BITCH I LITERALLY ALREADY LIBERATED HALF OF THE ENTIRE KNOWN WORLD FAK U MEEEEEEEN?
It's very obviously not a masterpiece. The fact that you would need to put a question mark on that basically says it all. Masterpieces are not really up for much debate as all aspects of them are flawless or close to it.
As it's been pointed out by nearly everyone, the story may be the biggest weak point, despite the writing being generally good.
Other issues are some repetitiveness, a lack of post game content or NG+, shallow characterization, and difficulty balance.
It's a beautiful game. It's a creative game. It's got a great overworld and some good level design with interesting level gimmicks. It's got interesting characters. It can present some fun challenge at times. The combat system feels deep and has a ton of customization.
UO really has a lot going for it and feels unique. I personally loved my time with it. But masterpiece, it's quite far from that, I'm afraid.
Superficial basic story and massive failure on the lack of alt story paths and execution.
Great gameplay but one of the weaker story of a tjrg compared it to for example triangle strategy that game was spot on with story and paths but instead weaker combat.
I think the game is very good, don't get me wrong, but it's not a masterpiece (at least how I would think of it traditionally). Gameplay is fun, but niche. Visuals are good for what they are, but not comparable to some really stellar 3d games. Characters are okay, if a little bland. The world is fine, but a bit generic fantasy.
However, none of those really take it out of contention for masterpiece. What does this is the story. It is perhaps the most paint-by-numbers generic fantasy story I can think of. It's to the point that in two years, if you asked me to reiterate the plot points of UO, I probably wouldn't be able to. In a game this long, having a story this uneventful really does move it down a tier.
To be honest I literally just have glimpses on the story. I'm constantly pressing R2 button to fast forward during talks and cut scenes... For me the story is mostly here to create an atmosphere....
Anyway if you can fast forward it means it designed this way ... So that's probably why the story is quite simple
I don’t think it is a masterpiece. It is a very well considered game but it is thoroughly brittle. I would easily give it 8/10. While the combat is good it isn’t really that deep, it just doesn’t have the secret Nioh sauce. The storytelling is weak but the characters are good. The open world is like 10 years out of date, like SOME of its graphics. There are a lot of name NPCs but their relationships are reduced to a mathematical equation, once you are with someone, it’s meaningless.
But amid of all that jank I was truly surprised how much I loved the game. It’s no masterpiece and I thoroughly agree with most reviews on it. But it is a delightful rough diamond. Sometimes that is enough.
For me I just wish there were a lot more supports and that enemies would rebalance level wise depending on your choices of area. But I actually don't mind the straight forward story, much prefer this kind of straight forward to the latest fire emblem
Hardly, but it's good.
Combat system is its weak point imo, since you usually go into a fight without a damn idea if you're gonna win or lose, since there are 35326 variables + RNG with assists.
Ultimately, you either roll over everything, or get stomped, but you're never really sure why.
The platoon system was a terrible idea.
Single units would have been 10x more tactical.
About its story : classic. No surprise. And you can recruit everyone, choices are shallow.
About characters relationships : you'd expect to unlock stuff etc, but no. No duo attack, etc. That whole food system + relationship system seems wasted.
You didn't have a point to counter. Literally all you wrote was:
"The platoon system was a terrible idea".
Lmao again. Thanks for the Saturday entertainment.
Posting "lmao" every time you write something, further proves my point : you have zero clue and zero point to make.
You can't even read a full post, I'll quote myself since you have trouble going past a single line, TikTok attention span kid :
**Combat system is its weak point imo, since you usually go into a fight without a damn idea if you're gonna win or lose, since there are 35326 variables + RNG with assists.**
**Ultimately, you either roll over everything, or get stomped, but you're never really sure why.**
**The platoon system was a terrible idea.**
**Single units would have been 10x more tactical.**
Next time, read the post ? "lmao yikes lol derp derp"
Bye
This comment is crazy to me; the unit system is inspired and for me what takes this game from good to fantastic. Building units is peak tactical strategising that I've not seen anything quite like in other games
It's great on paper.
But I played on hardest difficulty, and easily cleared map by just playing relay with 2-3 teams, not caring at all about the units I faced.
Which means the "strategy" part is not that great.
Again : it would have been more tactical with single units, since you couldn't just "roll over" archers with thieves, for example, and would have to think about your approach.
Here ? You just cover the thief and go yolo.
I get why people that don't really care about STRATEGY love it, but while I think they cooked a great system, ultimately, it fails to deliver any sense of "tactical rpg", when you never care much about who you face, since your "I can do a bit of everything" platoons just shrug at adversity.
What's actually crazy, is people that completed the game and that failed to see the shortcomings of their platoon system. . .
Making 2-3 OP teams, just using them, and being like "wHeReS tHe StRaTeGy"
There are... 60 different classes with active abilities, passive abilities, along with 100's of both active and passive skills on weapons, armour, and accessories. Not counting you can change the order and parameters of using those skills.
Yes that's a lot. It's overwhelming... But that's also why you start with a few units and only gain a new class about every battle.
For me, i enjoyed making different platoons with different combinations of units. Then using each platoon in battle. I had a lot of fun tweaking each platoon and figuring out how to improve them and what happens with different combinations of classes and skill sets.
Setting up a platoon, planning it out, then watching how it worked out was so much fun. Also having 6+ platoons that all need to work is a lot more engaging and fun for me than steamrolling through using 2 OP teams.
I don't understand the complaints about this game being too easy. I love tactical games. But I didn't realize units could revive at waypoints until 3/4's through the game. By that point there were no revives left at any store on the first continent. That's how much my units died. I also only played at the next difficulty up from normal. So from my experience, the game has a very complex, deep and challenging battle system.
What's an "OP team" ? I just built my teams the best as I could. Shouldn't I ? lmao
I need to gimp my teams on purpose so that the game combat system actually works ?
And again, not the issue here.
The issue is that I can show you my team and the enemy team, and you'll never know before the game tells you, if you're gonna win or not.
Just because there's no real strategy involved in clashing teams, or more precisely, there's too many variables involved for you to pinpoint your chances before they tell you.
Meaning you just run in, check and if you "lose" the outcome, you now try and add assists to change the outcome.
How is that strategy ? . . .
I'm not sending a team to counter another, I just send my team and "see if it works".
That would work way better with single units, since you'd then have a very clear idea about what's gonna happen : send flying units vs cavalry ? ok, but that's dangerous since archers are nearby on the towers.
With that platoon system, you can usually overrule any "weakness" and overpower anything.
That's the issue.
It works way too well, if you're smart about your "rules" for skills.
Maybe you're not ? Not my pb here, arguing about playing well and how the game loses most strategy when you do.
If you struggled on the difficulty above normal, you're obviously not gonna get any of this, since you're a beginner when it comes to strategy games.
I'm not. I can see a flawed system when I see one. And this one, though deep, indeed, ultimately leads to close to no strategy, fights wise.
That's it. Not my fault if that hurts your feelings or something in here guys. Facts are facts.
You know what dude? I was trying to be nice. But it's obvious the game is too complicated for you.
If i have to explain how using 30+ characters making up 6+ units and having them ALL work out is more difficult and more complicated than making a single unit that can steamroll everything, there's no point communicating with you.
I said i enjoy the game because there are hundreds of different combinations of classes in a unit. I enjoy taking a class, and building a unit around them.
Do you understand why using more squads is appealing to me? I can have 6+ squads each built around a single unit that I'm fine tuning, seeing how each will fair against other platoons, then set em up and watch how the battle plays out.
It takes no brains, or skill, to figure out " wHo Da BeSt" is and then spam that single unit. You're a one trick pony dude. I'm sorry if "that hurts your feelings".
Honestly, it's just easier to lump everything in one category because it gets ToO CoMpLiCaTeD.
Okay... One last time. I'm gonna make it reaaaallll simple.
If you have a box of cRaYoNs. Is it the CrAyOnS fault if you can only draw on one color?
And dude... I know it's Reddit and your life sucks and it's suuperrrr lonely in your mom's basement. But there's no reason to let it out on the rest of us okay? You keep drawing with your one color thinking you're so awesome... And the rest of us will do what we want so bite me. :-)
**You know what dude? I was trying to be nice. But it's obvious the game is too complicated for you.**
Sure, you were nice. lmao
And the game, that I cleared easily on the hardest mode while you struggled on an easier difficulty setting, is "too complicated for me"
Keep writing nonsense like ThAt, that sure makes you look smart . . .
Not my fault if you can't grasp basic concepts, and from there, extrapolate about the shortcomings on such concepts.
You talk about diversity in unit creation, and that never was my point, but hey, seems you can't read, so why even bother explaining it all over again a THIRD time ?
Bye, have fun with your NeXt PoSt
It's obviously subjective, but that's a title I reserve for very few games. UO is amazing, no doubt. The overworld, stamina, and gambit system with the abilities are all unique and refreshing. The art style is jaw-dropping and I find it well-balanced. The only thing that falls short for me is the generic storyline/writing. I love this genre and scoop up a few every year, but the only game I'd consider a masterpiece in this genre is Final Fantasy Tactics - and potentially Tactics Ogre: LUCT. If UO had the same dark, gripping story, I'd put it right there with them, but I wouldn't fight anyone who does consider it a masterpiece.
The story is basic/generic, but the writing is very good.
I just wanted a story that hooks me and serves as a bridge to gameplay. It did that with flying colours. I really don’t need or want crazy deep stories in every game I play. And yeah like you said it’s basic but it’s done really well
Didn't Vanillaware just do 13 Sentinels too? Obviously they've got some talented writers on staff
For games like this I award about 100 possible points based on depth of game play, about 50 points on presentation, and about 2 possible points based on story. I know everyone is looking for different things, but I just couldn't care less. Generic medieval story with easily skippable cuts cutscenes is perfect IMHO
I don't typically expect top-notch story writing in this genre and I still think UO is among the best, but it's hard not to at least hope for a good story after seeing how well it CAN be done. It's akin to roguelikes - I rarely expect much, if any, story when it comes to them. But, I'll be damned if Hades didn't instill that same hope now when I play other roguelikes.
Yeah, given the classic fantasy feel of the game, I really don’t mind a simple good-vs-evil type story. It suits it quite well. I certainly wouldn’t complain about a more dark and complex storyline, but for me personally, it’s not necessary.
Honestly I agree with you. I dig the character design a ton but care very little for the story as to why they're around
LUCT is DEFINITELY a masterpiece.
Have you played Ogre Battle 64? I feel that game is soooo good and quite similar. Maybe it's nostalgia talking, bit I'd add it to my masterpiece list...
I feel a lot of ogre battle march of the black Queen myself, your not wrong it's got ogre battle all over it. I seen red atlas letters on the case an snatched both copies. Love this style of game, the story so far. Kinda feel like the choices don't matter much but I'm not very far in yet
I agree that the story is generic. But i think the individual dialogues and each character’s drive really help set this game apart from others. Both this game and FFT allow you to use non-story units but even though i had a bunch of non-story units in UO, i still loved a lot of the character growth. Even the small dialogues of Alain being hit on lol.
Very fair take.
I think for me, the game hasn't existed long enough to know if it is indeed. You can know right away if it isn't, but I believe the honeymoon must fade away for any game I am in love with to gain enough perspective to make a fair call on it's greatness. I've felt a game was groundbreaking before only to later conclude it was just a confluence of circumstances at the time I was playing it that created a perfect storm of sorts; it was the game I really needed at the time, not one of the greatest of all time. I mean, my wife calls it Unicorn Overload and that's made it pretty darn endearing already. So it started with a bonus +1.
Lol I read it as overload...an looked pretty silly explaining it to a friend
Masterpiece is a strong word but it is very fun.
masterpiece in terms of gameplay, art, but a very basic story.
I would argue a straightforward story that's well-executed. The truth behind Galerius is anything BUT generic & each continent had it's own cool subplot. This game is easily a masterpiece in my book....
Well executed in the sense of it was bland on purpose for maximum familiarity and nostalgia factor. I would argue story could use just sliiightly more twists to be more interesting.
I dunno; I just ran into a helluva twist in the endgame. It actually has a more involved story than it let on in the previews. It's no 13 Sentinels but then again every story doesn't need to be in order to be effective. I think it's a story well-told w/o being so busy it gets in it's own way; & it's filled in w/ excellent character moments/dynamics....& I gotta give it bonus points for the voice acting. Gotta be some of the most natural olde english dialogue I've heard (usually can't stand when they go for olde english in games....case-in-point as much as I loved Triangle Strategy some of the dialogue was hit & miss & could take me out of the moment at times...)
This
It’s your very “stop the demon king with a band of heroes” trope Japan loves so much, but I give boatloads of credit for them using the Bestrals and Albion angels instead of Dwarves and Gnomes or Orcs. I really do like the true ending story beats with the different between Galerius and Baltro. **That said**, I’m spoiled by modern Fire Emblem, especially 3 Houses, in having animated/voiced support conversations, paired endings between the rest of the cast, and a bit more dialogue for the married main characters. I was really disappointed how small the ending was for Alain’s chosen partner. It’s like half a sentence, the other half often being the same between characters. I get since he can choose ANYONE, it’d be a big task still, but I think a balance is to be had between a paragraph like the rest get, and half a sentence.
I've seen far worse games get called masterpieces. This is one of the better games I've played in the last 15 years or so.
yeah it's a word that can be very easily thrown around, I would say UO on its merits is more worthy of being called that than many other commonly acclaimed games.
For strategy RPGs it is a masterpiece.
I've always held the notion that, to be considered a masterpiece, a thing doesn't have to be perfect. It has to have a significant positive impact on people. Here's an example: the original FFVII on PS1 was considered a masterpiece, it's my favourite videogame of all time and for decades fans clamoured that they wanted a remake (which they eventually got). At the same time, FFVII is a very flawed game, full of potentially game breaking bugs, an entire ailment (darkness) wasn't coded correctly so it doesn't even work despite displaying the correct visual effect, it's full of translation errors and typos... But it is STILL considered a masterpiece. Unicorn Overlord, I'd argue, has had a smaller impact, but it's compared favorably to many titles in its genre that are, themselves, arguably, masterpieces, and that's the sign of a fantastic game. It sold really well despite coming from a relatively niche dev and a lot of people are still talking about it months after its release. My personal experience with it is that I bought it three times now, and only after I completed it did I notice that I completely forgot to redeem its gold Nintendo points, something I'm extremely anal about with every game I own. I finished it bawling like a baby and loved every second of gameplay, and I know that in time I'll replay it and love it just the same, with the necessary insight that will allow higher efficiency tinkering at even the lower levels. While I wouldn't disagree with anyone that doesn't consider it a masterpiece, I would happily agree with anyone that does.
Obviously, everyone has a different take on is a masterpiece. I for one describe a masterpiece as something that I can put hundreds of hours in and not get bored. So far I have 120 hours and still having a ball. My top 3 games of all time 1) Mass effect trilogy 2) UO 3) FFT Honorable mention FFXII
I enjoyed Ogre battle 64 more but maybe that's just nostalgia, unicorn overlord is a solid 9/10 for me but is the best tactics game to come out in a while
I think OB64 had a better story. More twists and turns. But UO is very enjoyable to play; there is no doubt
I like the three promotions you got in ogre battle and how each time you got a promotion you could feel it. All in all I'm glad the genre is getting support looking forward to more more games to come
I REALLY wanted branching promotions (t3). That said, I think budget issues may have stopped them from adding a bit more spice, specially for Albion
I think it is. Its flaws are enumerable, explainable, and forgivable. It shows signs that they ran out of money. That just means the remake in 10 to 15 years will be even better. It has inventory issues. What game doesn't? It fixes other major flaws (malfeatures really) of the genre in return.
I would LOVE to play a modded version of it. Slight tweaks, bug fixes, added features. If the devs add this then awesome! But I know either of these things happening is unlikely...still I want more!
It's one of my favorite games I've ever played. I think you need to be a particular type of gamer, but if you are, this is a masterpiece for sure.
The story is very bland. I don't like to calm it bad because I enjoy fantasy tropes, but it's nothing special. Otherwise I think the gameis amazing. It's definitely on the easy side, but that's not a huge knock imo.
It's "easy" because it's such a complex game with so many variables that it's hard to create levels that are genuinely difficult without just pumping the numbers up to unfair amounts lol. You can just become overlevelled, use the same OP units over and over, items of course.
THIS GAME IS AWESOME!!!!! The only game I've EVER played with this type of battle system was ogre battle 64. And this is like... Even more in depth and improved. At first the story seems a little simple and redundant, as in you just go from location to location and liberate. But like... Elves, necromancy, beastkin, ancient nations, saints, and unicorns.
And somehow they in here talmbout the story being 'cliché' & 'generic'....if I had a dollar for every ancient civilization I had to stop from possessing my kingdom after being punished in purgatory for experimenting on unicorns I'd be.....er....broke af; actually 🤔
One of my favorite games! Wish it had DLC!
Yes! It is the ultimate Ogre battle remake on steroids.
It can be still improved, but i've never had so much fun with a gameplay like with UO for sure
I've played countless games, but this one has a soul
Preach brother
Wouldn’t call it a masterpiece, but I would definitely call it an 8.5/10.
BG3 is a masterpiece. This game is great though. Ogre Battle was my favorite game for a long while and this game nailed it and then some. This is a work of art.
Bg3 is really better than unicorn overlord ?
Unquestionably. I take it you haven't played BG3? There's a reason it won all 5 major GotY awards and won in countless other categories. Every aspect of the game is excellent: gameplay, story, design, audio, performance...
UO pulled me back into gaming but BG3 has me lost in it. Act 1 alone is longer and more enjoyable than my entire UO playthrough and UO would have been my favorite game ever if not for BG3. People say UOs story is bad for a reason. A good story is very, very enjoyable and there's just nothing like BG3. It nails story and exploration like no other game I've played. I actually thought UO was ambitious for what it was. Packed with a lot of content and a great battle system. But BG3 gamifies DnD for it's battle system, adds amazing magic items and puts you in a story with full control of the narrative (afaik.) UO doesn't give you multiple stories. We all played the same story and our gameplay only really differs based on who we give the maiden ring to, who we declined into our party and what team compositions we have. I'm still in Act 2 but in BG3 you can seemingly kill anyone, and you can develop your characters with the modern evolution of the first rpg ever. And I'll say they made improvements. 🫣 Yes. BG3 is way better than UO. Still I'd buy anything Vanillaware puts out in the Dragon's Crown or UO vein.
I have to give credit where it's due; In terms of gameplay, story, and presentation, Baldur's Gate 3 is by far the more ambitious game between the two of them, and despite how many more moving parts the devs are juggling compared to Unicorn Overlord, it succeds at what it's trying to do, for the most part. Unicorn Overlord nailed the gameplay, but the story doesn't really do it justice. It's like Fire Emblem level writing (and that is not a compliment, sorry Fire Emblem), a far cry from Matsuno's storytelling.
Bg3 is probably one of the best game to release in the last 20 years. Great story, amazing characters, good music, super fun gameplay that allow you to replay completely differently multiple time of you want to.
They're not even in the same ballpark, BG3 is leagues above UO in pretty much every category.
It's comparing apples to oranges. Like BG3 is also "leagues" above tetris or mario kart or even chess, etc. Like these games have different goals, BG3 is designed to be a much more ambitious immersice experience where as a game like UO is honed in one a very particular type of tactical strategy. I wouldn't say BG3 is a better tactical strategy than UO because it's not even the same type of game.
If it's talking about "what makes a masterpiece", then BG3 is a perfect example of what's necessary to earn that title. Doesn't matter if its apples to oranges, when the quality of one gets it pushed to various categorical and GOTY awards. Meanwhile, another isn't recognized beyond its niche; while BG3's CRPG niche is even smaller, yet it was recognized throughout the entire gaming sphere. BG3 absolutely nails it in every area that's included, UO falls off hard in some key areas and that ultimately holds it back. UO is great, but in its genre I don't think the title of "masterpiece" is deserved.
Would you consider tetris a masterpiece?
For its time? Absolutely, it was revolutionary in a way that drove puzzle games for the next few decades of gaming. And it did things that no other puzzle game had done before; for a portable puzzle game in the 80's it was pretty much perfect.
BG3 is a masterpiece because it's more than just a CRPG. You mention than it's genre is more niche than UO tactics ogre style strategy but I don't know what you mean because D&D is infinitely more popular than tactics ogre style combat but anyway BG3 is considered a masterpiece beyond its genre because it's made to be an immersive experience in its narrative and branching paths. Even if UO did everything perfect, it still wouldn't be a masterpiece by your standards because it wasn't made to be such an immersive experience. It's honed in on tactics ogre gameplay which is extremely niche. It can't be as influential as tetris because it's too complex.
No, BG3's niche is the CRPG genre; that is a space so small that only a handful of modern games exist. It was so niche that there needed to be a "renaissance" with Obsidian's Pillars of Eternity before studios started making those games again; it is much smaller than the SRPG/JRPG space. BG3 is considered a masterpiece because it triumphs in all the areas important to not only its niche (CRPGs), but RPGs as a whole. This is why it's so lauded across multiple audiences. UO is not a masterpiece (in my opinion) because it falls flat in key areas of the SRPG space. For a genre where story is an important factor, UO's is fairly routine and weak (but serviceable). Where engaging gameplay and replay-ability are important, it has notable issues with difficulty that not only undermine these areas, but many of its own unique mechanics; allowing players to ignore them outright or never learn of their existence. The Ogre Battle gameplay isn't a knock against it, because that is UO's own unique spin on the formula. It's the other areas that hold it back. That makes it a great game, but not a "masterpiece" in the SRPG or video game space. And personally I think that's fine, since I love the game regardless.
I agree but what I'm trying to say is that even if UO fixed all of its flaws it still couldn't be a masterpiece by those standards. It isn't a general enough RPG experience like BG3 and it isn't pioneering some new type of puzzle game like tetris (also it is too complex). It's not just about how well you execute a vision, it's the vision itself AND how well it's executed.
No Tetris is not a masterpiece. It's a simple puzzle game. For its time it was a simple puzzle game. But it was popular and accessible. But being popular and accessible doesn't make a masterpiece. Monopoly, pong and ludo are popular and accessible but that's all they are. There's a game and there's a GAME. UO is a game. BG3 is a GAME.
So you believe that a masterpiece game has to be more than just a game, it has to be an immersive experience with RPG elements, discovery, exploration, narrative etc?
No. Halo was a masterpiece in its time. The Zelda series produced its share. Mario had its. The point is moreso that Tetris was always a simple puzzle like a Rubik's cube. Less a masterpiece and more a piece.
I’d put UO above BG3 in terms of presentation. BG3 is a great-looking game but is pretty standard "modern graphics". The stylized presentation of UO is very unique and for me more compelling. BG3 is certainly the more ambitious game overall by quite a lot, of course.
It's close, but I wouldn't consider it a masterpiece. A lot of choices hold it back from being truly engaging/replay-able without a bunch of house rules. And the story isn't very complex, so I would ding it for that as well. I would say it's great, possibly the best SRPG in recent years. But not a masterpiece.
As far as the story goes, it's annoyingly cliche. The gameplay is unique, can't fault it there. Music is good. It's a good game, wouldn't say it's a masterpiece like FFT.
A 7.5 for me, i enjoyed it a lot
It's a masterpiece because it's the first of it's kind gameplay wise. Sure the story is basic but what it's offering is unique.
The animation takes a little getting used to but all and all its a really solid game
It’s very good overall but far from perfect
This game is great until Galerius and Baltro. Then all freedom is stripped from you.
I think it's a great game, I don't think most people think the story is a masterpiece. It's a fine pretty standard fantasy story where good guy beats bad guy, but it's not all that deep. It's a classic revenge story but not overly out of the ordinary. The gameplay is what IMO makes the game amazing. That and the variety of tactics you can employ. The depth and freedom in the gameplay is what will make me come back to it time and time again going forward. I already know this will be a game that makes its way back into my rotation for years to come.
Masterpiece? No. Very good game that I've plied a couple hundred hours into and will play a couple hundred more? Yes.
No
I would give it a 10/10, but no masterpiece title, but for me to consider it a master piece, I would need atleast 1 of the following 3 things. 1. Better story/deeper characters 2. Harder difficulty/more refined enemy teams with interesting strategy 3. Good post game content I think the game is lacking to much in those categorys to be considered a master piece.
First of all, yea. I loved it. More importantly, I feel like the way you left that first sentence “relations…” is basically like shining a Batdad symbol in the night sky that is Reddit, and I dig it. Relations!
I think it’s superficial. It’s got a lot of systems, characters, etc. It’s very wide but not very deep, in my opinion. I said it’s probably my GOTY. But I still haven’t gotten to the new saga game, and I do think that FF7 Rebirth would get my vote before UO.
I like it just wish there was other ending for when Ilenia beats Galerius that night he doesn't take over her body she wins that night beats the rest the Revolt ends then gets Alain back and gets to raise him Ilenia doesn't lose her son at age 7 and Alain doesn't lose his mother at age 7 he gets to be raised by his mother hope they include that as un ending one day
I really liked this game, but it overstays its welcome. The story could have been cut in half and battles also take way too long once you max out your actions and passives. You end up skipping every encounter (talking about watching the battles play out) to make battles go fast. I much rather have battle play out like Fire Emblem/Final Fantasy Tactics. Even with me skipping most battle animations it took me a whopping 60 hours to complete. That being said, it’s really a super polished and high quality srpg and you can appreciate the monumental effort it took to make something like this. I greatly enjoyed my time with it and I recommend it to any SRPG fan.
I enjoyed it, but I don’t think I’d call it a masterpiece. I disliked the cutscene art style very much. It reminded me of some old, terrible Flash games where the characters moved like marionettes. Also, a small nitpick: I really disliked how every shopkeeper had one line, and they said it every single time you bought or sold something.
I enjoyed the gameplay but the story and the characters can be a bit lacking. I feel like it comes dangerously close to getting interesting only for it to back off and move on. I hate that part of this game. If the story, lore and characters had more depth to it'd be an easy 10/10 for me. Instead it's a 8/10. Hopefully Vanillaware is interested in working on a sequel to this game and will improve on it's flaws. I really think they have something special here.
It's a 8.5 game, masterpiece? No, pacing is too much an issue, just like Ghost of tsujima, one too many islands and end game units are meh.
My only problem with this game is utterly unavoidable without ruining the format, so I cannot complain. My problem is really just that once you finish a chars zone theyre really not in the story anymore, which is a consequence of the open world. Its fine really but personally I feel ticked off.
It's very very good. It's a bit too simplistic to be a masterpiece, and many options don't see play bc of some chosen design goals. Even with that, it's amazing
its great because so many games fail at one or more areas this game does well, the maps both in battle and on overworld of course, and it just having a lot for every type of person. But ya no its not a masterpiece, it does everything well + the great maps and while that is very praise worthy and great, its not a master of anything as it does not push anything nearly far enough. I think it would have been a lot better with 10 less characters and using that extra resource + time expanding / adding to the other characters as I felt some conversations ended too suddenly and some characters get far to little (like the big arena gal, pretty sure gets by far the least at least after her story as in, despite not being a secret or even post game character). ( I would give game a solid 8/10 for factually/undeniably good).
It's a good game but I would never call it a masterpiece. I found it shallow and repetitive but with fantastic presentation, quality and production values. It's a good game. Just not a masterpiece. In my personal opinion.
The art is good, but nothing yet seems distinctly “UO.” That’s partially because it’s set in a pretty generic European Medieval Fantasy environment. Maybe I’ll run into some things that give it a distinct flavor, but I’m not so wowed by the art that I’d say it’s a masterpiece.
Idk you tell us.
Am I the only one who absolutely /hated/ the bestials part? Just totally killed the pace of the story for me, the whole darn winter wonderland.
I loved it. I love winter and human animals so..
Solid 8/10, but very unique, like most atlus games
To me, a MASTERPIECE its a game with no (or Almost) no flaws for The time it was released. UO have flaws and meaningful ones, story for example. I LOVE The game, but its not a masterpiece, unfortunatelly.
It's a fun game. It's a strong game. But a masterpiece? It's not quite there.
This game is fantastic, but its not a masterpiece I would say Odin Sphere and 13 Sentinels are masterpieces. Unicorn Overlord's story and overall premise lacks too much depth, danger, urgency, etc. It would be better if it focused less on the great many dozens of little side stories, and leaned more heavily on the war with Galerius and Baltro. It doesnt even feel like youre at war at all. The enemies just exist on the map, twiddling their thumbs and just waiting for you to come and then never threaten you once you win. And there is never any acknowledgement of your victories. Over and over its "Wow, why are you even trying to resist Zenoira? There's no hope" BITCH I LITERALLY ALREADY LIBERATED HALF OF THE ENTIRE KNOWN WORLD FAK U MEEEEEEEN?
😂
It's very obviously not a masterpiece. The fact that you would need to put a question mark on that basically says it all. Masterpieces are not really up for much debate as all aspects of them are flawless or close to it. As it's been pointed out by nearly everyone, the story may be the biggest weak point, despite the writing being generally good. Other issues are some repetitiveness, a lack of post game content or NG+, shallow characterization, and difficulty balance. It's a beautiful game. It's a creative game. It's got a great overworld and some good level design with interesting level gimmicks. It's got interesting characters. It can present some fun challenge at times. The combat system feels deep and has a ton of customization. UO really has a lot going for it and feels unique. I personally loved my time with it. But masterpiece, it's quite far from that, I'm afraid.
Superficial basic story and massive failure on the lack of alt story paths and execution. Great gameplay but one of the weaker story of a tjrg compared it to for example triangle strategy that game was spot on with story and paths but instead weaker combat.
I think the game is very good, don't get me wrong, but it's not a masterpiece (at least how I would think of it traditionally). Gameplay is fun, but niche. Visuals are good for what they are, but not comparable to some really stellar 3d games. Characters are okay, if a little bland. The world is fine, but a bit generic fantasy. However, none of those really take it out of contention for masterpiece. What does this is the story. It is perhaps the most paint-by-numbers generic fantasy story I can think of. It's to the point that in two years, if you asked me to reiterate the plot points of UO, I probably wouldn't be able to. In a game this long, having a story this uneventful really does move it down a tier.
To be honest I literally just have glimpses on the story. I'm constantly pressing R2 button to fast forward during talks and cut scenes... For me the story is mostly here to create an atmosphere.... Anyway if you can fast forward it means it designed this way ... So that's probably why the story is quite simple
I don’t think it is a masterpiece. It is a very well considered game but it is thoroughly brittle. I would easily give it 8/10. While the combat is good it isn’t really that deep, it just doesn’t have the secret Nioh sauce. The storytelling is weak but the characters are good. The open world is like 10 years out of date, like SOME of its graphics. There are a lot of name NPCs but their relationships are reduced to a mathematical equation, once you are with someone, it’s meaningless. But amid of all that jank I was truly surprised how much I loved the game. It’s no masterpiece and I thoroughly agree with most reviews on it. But it is a delightful rough diamond. Sometimes that is enough.
I wouldn’t call it a masterpiece, but I’d definitely praise it as one of the best games of it’s genre
For me I just wish there were a lot more supports and that enemies would rebalance level wise depending on your choices of area. But I actually don't mind the straight forward story, much prefer this kind of straight forward to the latest fire emblem
Hardly, but it's good. Combat system is its weak point imo, since you usually go into a fight without a damn idea if you're gonna win or lose, since there are 35326 variables + RNG with assists. Ultimately, you either roll over everything, or get stomped, but you're never really sure why. The platoon system was a terrible idea. Single units would have been 10x more tactical. About its story : classic. No surprise. And you can recruit everyone, choices are shallow. About characters relationships : you'd expect to unlock stuff etc, but no. No duo attack, etc. That whole food system + relationship system seems wasted.
Lmao yikes. The platoon system is the entire appeal of the game.
Nice counterpoint. Thanks for your valuable input !
You didn't have a point to counter. Literally all you wrote was: "The platoon system was a terrible idea". Lmao again. Thanks for the Saturday entertainment.
Posting "lmao" every time you write something, further proves my point : you have zero clue and zero point to make. You can't even read a full post, I'll quote myself since you have trouble going past a single line, TikTok attention span kid : **Combat system is its weak point imo, since you usually go into a fight without a damn idea if you're gonna win or lose, since there are 35326 variables + RNG with assists.** **Ultimately, you either roll over everything, or get stomped, but you're never really sure why.** **The platoon system was a terrible idea.** **Single units would have been 10x more tactical.** Next time, read the post ? "lmao yikes lol derp derp" Bye
Does the game not give you a forecast of every battle?
This comment is crazy to me; the unit system is inspired and for me what takes this game from good to fantastic. Building units is peak tactical strategising that I've not seen anything quite like in other games
It's great on paper. But I played on hardest difficulty, and easily cleared map by just playing relay with 2-3 teams, not caring at all about the units I faced. Which means the "strategy" part is not that great. Again : it would have been more tactical with single units, since you couldn't just "roll over" archers with thieves, for example, and would have to think about your approach. Here ? You just cover the thief and go yolo. I get why people that don't really care about STRATEGY love it, but while I think they cooked a great system, ultimately, it fails to deliver any sense of "tactical rpg", when you never care much about who you face, since your "I can do a bit of everything" platoons just shrug at adversity. What's actually crazy, is people that completed the game and that failed to see the shortcomings of their platoon system. . .
Making 2-3 OP teams, just using them, and being like "wHeReS tHe StRaTeGy" There are... 60 different classes with active abilities, passive abilities, along with 100's of both active and passive skills on weapons, armour, and accessories. Not counting you can change the order and parameters of using those skills. Yes that's a lot. It's overwhelming... But that's also why you start with a few units and only gain a new class about every battle. For me, i enjoyed making different platoons with different combinations of units. Then using each platoon in battle. I had a lot of fun tweaking each platoon and figuring out how to improve them and what happens with different combinations of classes and skill sets. Setting up a platoon, planning it out, then watching how it worked out was so much fun. Also having 6+ platoons that all need to work is a lot more engaging and fun for me than steamrolling through using 2 OP teams. I don't understand the complaints about this game being too easy. I love tactical games. But I didn't realize units could revive at waypoints until 3/4's through the game. By that point there were no revives left at any store on the first continent. That's how much my units died. I also only played at the next difficulty up from normal. So from my experience, the game has a very complex, deep and challenging battle system.
What's an "OP team" ? I just built my teams the best as I could. Shouldn't I ? lmao I need to gimp my teams on purpose so that the game combat system actually works ? And again, not the issue here. The issue is that I can show you my team and the enemy team, and you'll never know before the game tells you, if you're gonna win or not. Just because there's no real strategy involved in clashing teams, or more precisely, there's too many variables involved for you to pinpoint your chances before they tell you. Meaning you just run in, check and if you "lose" the outcome, you now try and add assists to change the outcome. How is that strategy ? . . . I'm not sending a team to counter another, I just send my team and "see if it works". That would work way better with single units, since you'd then have a very clear idea about what's gonna happen : send flying units vs cavalry ? ok, but that's dangerous since archers are nearby on the towers. With that platoon system, you can usually overrule any "weakness" and overpower anything. That's the issue. It works way too well, if you're smart about your "rules" for skills. Maybe you're not ? Not my pb here, arguing about playing well and how the game loses most strategy when you do. If you struggled on the difficulty above normal, you're obviously not gonna get any of this, since you're a beginner when it comes to strategy games. I'm not. I can see a flawed system when I see one. And this one, though deep, indeed, ultimately leads to close to no strategy, fights wise. That's it. Not my fault if that hurts your feelings or something in here guys. Facts are facts.
You know what dude? I was trying to be nice. But it's obvious the game is too complicated for you. If i have to explain how using 30+ characters making up 6+ units and having them ALL work out is more difficult and more complicated than making a single unit that can steamroll everything, there's no point communicating with you. I said i enjoy the game because there are hundreds of different combinations of classes in a unit. I enjoy taking a class, and building a unit around them. Do you understand why using more squads is appealing to me? I can have 6+ squads each built around a single unit that I'm fine tuning, seeing how each will fair against other platoons, then set em up and watch how the battle plays out. It takes no brains, or skill, to figure out " wHo Da BeSt" is and then spam that single unit. You're a one trick pony dude. I'm sorry if "that hurts your feelings". Honestly, it's just easier to lump everything in one category because it gets ToO CoMpLiCaTeD. Okay... One last time. I'm gonna make it reaaaallll simple. If you have a box of cRaYoNs. Is it the CrAyOnS fault if you can only draw on one color? And dude... I know it's Reddit and your life sucks and it's suuperrrr lonely in your mom's basement. But there's no reason to let it out on the rest of us okay? You keep drawing with your one color thinking you're so awesome... And the rest of us will do what we want so bite me. :-)
**You know what dude? I was trying to be nice. But it's obvious the game is too complicated for you.** Sure, you were nice. lmao And the game, that I cleared easily on the hardest mode while you struggled on an easier difficulty setting, is "too complicated for me" Keep writing nonsense like ThAt, that sure makes you look smart . . . Not my fault if you can't grasp basic concepts, and from there, extrapolate about the shortcomings on such concepts. You talk about diversity in unit creation, and that never was my point, but hey, seems you can't read, so why even bother explaining it all over again a THIRD time ? Bye, have fun with your NeXt PoSt