rgraves

Ahhh Pug, let's clear a few things up 1/ IMO Edge were wrong. There is no massive handicap for players who dip in and out of the game. The spells are deliberately handed out on a per-level basis for exactly this purpose. Do you honestly think that the designers would develop the spell system this way, and then go on to make it worthless by making players who hadn't 'levelled up' too weak to join in games? Well I can tell you, they didn't. It's perfectly possible for people to dip in and out of the game. That's exactly the way I am playing it right now with my friends. When they are not around I am ploughing on in one-player. So far it has caused us ZERO problems. I can only call it as I see it, and I see it as a nothing issue that Edge has decided to make a big deal about. 2/ People who can play it properly are few and far between - absolutely. SquareEnix (let's not forget this is their game and not a Nintendo one eh) designed and developed the game with this in mind. It was *never intended* to be anything other than that. For all those people who seem to think it was supposed to be something else, you're wrong. It was never going to be a mass-market FF title. The SquareEnix sales targets reflect this. They knew what they were doing, and I would suspect that they probably enjoyed working on a niche title for a change in fact. It is clearly a title aimed at the multiplayer market - it makes no excuses for it. It places high demands on the player. But if you meet those criteria, it's a joy to play. A real delight. If you don't, then you are not who the game was targetted at. Regardless of how many FF titles you already own, or if you love FF or anything else - you were not the target market. Get over it and move on. Honestly, I can't believe how selfish people are being about this just because they can't play the game as it was intended. So what? Some people can, and it's a great game when played that way.

But I left the bit about Edge in - I didn't cut anything from the quote. And the game doesn't really do a 'level' system that would massively handicap a player who had just joined. There is some stats improvement over time yes, but it doesn't immediately rule out new players joining a game. The idea of 'low level' people getting hammered is not an issue at all really.

What's that review supposed to show? Just to be perfectly clear, I am playing the game myself so I am 100% sure about the way players can join/leave games etc

Is anybody else noticing that the people who have actually played the game are the ones defending it, and the ones that haven't are the ones knocking it. Funny how we've yet to come across anybody who has actually played it multiplayer and still thinks it's not worth the effort (though I'm sure somebody will pop up now!).

There is no truth to it at all - players can come and go as required. The spells etc are dished out on a per level basis to make sure it works in this way.

Why can't you play the game? Do you have a GC? Yes? Then you can - in single player. If you then want to play multiplayer, you (or the people you are playing with at least) need to have the GBAs. That's the way it is.

Good job you don't have to then isn't it - the GBA part of the deal certainly opens up a few more possiblities in terms of different software than the Tekki controller.......but let's not go there. Just accept that the game is not for you. There is nothing wrong with that.

That's just silly. You can't factor in the cost of the GC console - where do you stop, Electricity? Room space? Lighting? Food? Water? And you shouldn't be buying 4 GBAs - the intention is that your friends have their own GBAs. If they don't, the game is obviously not for you move along. Where's the problem?

Apparently it's a Mario Kart a-like

That's exactly what Dyack said: He also hinted at something a bit extra as well...

Just slay the mofo in single player and move on...she can join you again post slaughter

1/ Yep, they'd do. Might need some good lighting though 2/ It's pretty easy to learn - nothing too complicated at all. 3/ The single/multiplayer games are one in the same adventure - the game appears to adjust the difficulty level depending on how many people are playing.

Yes there is - I got that stamp and it immediately said that a mini-game was available (I think it was from the port early on - the one where you can train on the beach again if you want to). Mind you, I got that playing one-player, and as the mini-game it unlocked was multiplayer only I haven't had chance to get everybody together to try it out again yet! For everybody worried about the singleplayer side of things, I don;t actually think it's that bad. Multiplayer is certainly where the game wants to be, but it's not terrible or anything alone. Oh, and yes you can play in single then add people in to your existing adventure as they visit etc. You don't always need to have everybody/anybody(!) there to continue your game.

It's a shame that the game has picked up so much bad press - it really is delightful when played multiplayer. Can I just also add that the effect when crossing a stream is

*cough* use the "returns" service *cough*

You could say that, but then every system has restrictions - there is no way on earth to offer every available option to a player. Something has to give and, IMO, Retro chose the right things to 'give'. They made the stuff you really needed to do (navigate a 3-D world, tackle fast enemies and platform jump) easy, and removed the other stuff (freelook etc). Any other system would have been needlessly complicated IMO.

Do give over, my troll piccie was as a result/in response to this: Which is trolling by anybodies standards. I've stayed out of the MP controls discussion as Sprite was reading my mind They did what they needed to do, and made what could have been complicated (3-D movement/combat/platforming) relatively simple.

- Fixed

It gives you some kind of health regeneration thing-a-me-do apparently.

No, you can unlock PoP 1 by smashing down a specific wall about 30% or so into the game. According to GameFAQs:

Eh? They are two shots - one from the PS1 and one from the GC, bundled together into one file. It's perfectly possible that the original GC shot was taken with colours compressed, but the PS1 one not. Bundle them together and you have a GC shot with poor colours and a fine PS1 shot. Them both being in one single image now has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the quality of either of the original captures. Add that to the fact that nobody really seems to have mastered the art of GC screen grabs in the way that Tecmo have for the XBox *massive winkey smily*, and you have a perfectly possible explanation for the seemingly dark/poor GC screens. I repeat, the game looked way better in motion than these shots suggest months ago. Blimey, do you have a copy of the game there then? How does it play......

I am beginning to wonder if Sony haven't changed tack slightly though - they certainly appear to be giving it a more games-only focus than they originally set out with.

I'm wondering, if Sony are going to ditch wireless comms, MP3 functions etc etc what exactly does the PSP bring to the party apart from better graphics? When they first annouced this they were touting a wonderful multimedia machine, but it all seems to be going backwards in that area. Indeed, it's looking more like a simple GBA++ every day.

You know, I thought the most interesting tid-bit in there was that they might be dropping the wireless comms.......a nod towards battery life issues perhaps?