Update on Crystal Chronicles' multiplayer

[OB1]

Stupid Nintendo:

July 08, 2003 - Nintendo today updated its Japanese info website for Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles with confirmation that the final game will indeed require GBA units for its multiplayer mode.

Though pre-release versions of the game (such as the one we experienced at E3) enabled standard controllers to be used when playing with two or more players, the final Japanese game requires that each player uses his own Game Boy Advance unit, connected to the GameCube controller ports via GBA link cables.

The single player quest can be enjoyed with three different control configurations:

1. Standard GameCube controller
2. Game Boy Advance as controller
3. Standard GameCube controller & GBA

To make the multiplayer requirements a bit more palatable, the Japanese version of Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles ships with a free GBA link cable.

When a Game Boy Advance is connected, the handheld functions as a menu screen.

While the left GameCube screen shows all the action, the GBA screen to the right displays attack and defend commands (blue bars), abilities like Fire, Blizzard, and Thunder (pink bars), and items like the life-renewing Phoenix Down (green bar).

The right side of the GBA display shows character stats, such as strength, defense, magic, etc. Here's what the two displays look like side-by-side:



As seen at E3, there is also a GBA map mode that helps pinpoint the player location.

No word yet on whether the US version will have the exact same requirements, but given the relatively close launch date, we're expecting the two versions to be identical. We'll have more on Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles soon.

Wonderful.

[Great Rumbler]

Luckily I have three GBAs floating around my house, so this won't be too much of a problem. I have to admit, though, this isn't a very smart way to do it.

[OB1]

No, it isn't. Nintendo should be pushing GBA-GC connectivity more than GC-GBA connectivity. They should try to get GBA owners to buy Gamecubes, not the other way around.

[Nintendarse]

As a former high school student, I know it can be tough to round up a few friends and convince them to play video games unless you've got a hardcore group. I certainly don't know 3 people that own GBA's that I'd be willing to invite over to my house, let alone whether THEY'd would want to. So for all those homebies, Nintendo is giving you the shaft. Sorry.

Luckily for me, I'm heading into a place where this foolish mistake might not require so much money (buying 3 GBA's) or effort (inviting people you don't know over to your house) on my part: college. There's got to be at least 3 other friendly people at college with GBA's that are willing to play FF:CC.

For the rest of the population, Nintendo has made a big mistake. Yes, it's good to encourage socialization, but Nintendo's asking for too much effort out of the consumer to reap the benefits of the game.

[Dark Jaguar]

GBAs are so popular that perhaps it would be easy to find people owning one. To be honest I think all my friends have GBAs (can't think of any who don't anyway). The problem for me is that almost no one except me has a GBA to GCN link cable, but fortunatly Crystal Chronicles comes WITH one, so as long as this ends up being a very popular game (and among my friends, FF is a big name, so they'll at least be getting it), I do believe suddenly the link cable will be popular as well.

Still though, the option for using controllers during multiplayer would have been nice. Sure, whatever on screen solution they come up with would likely not be nearly as nice, but at the very least they gave us a choice. It's just like how PD allows a max of 8 sims AND 4 players at once. Sure, at that level it's choppy enough that even I notice it, but they let us CHOOSE whether or not we would have a problem with it ourselves, instead of just removing the OPTION completely. It couldn't possibly hurt the game to give us the CHOICE.

[OB1]

That's very true, but unfortunately not the mentality of most video game developers. Just look at most of the console FPS's out there. Lots of games only give us maybe two-to-three control configurations with absolutely zero customization, so anyone who's used to the Turok-style control scheme is left out. More customization never hurt anyone!

[Private Hudson]

I was under the impression that only one GBA was required for multiplayer?

Anyways, anyone I know who owns a GameCube already owns a GCN, so... whatever. :):)

[OB1]

Well one GBA if you're only playing two-player co-op, I assume.

[Dark Jaguar]

Anyone you know who owns a Gamecube already owns a GCN eh? That's nice to know :D, but do they also have a GBA?

I think you got an article about it confused. You need only 3 GBAs if you have 4 players. What they said was you can have only one player (player 1) using a GCN controller, not a GBA.

[OB1]

That's why I said you only need one GBA if you're only playing two-player co-op.

[Dark Jaguar]

I was talking to PH, elaborating on what you said for clarity.

[OB1]

You should have said that.

[Dark Jaguar]

I didn't think I needed to :D. I thought it was quite apparent...

*insert joke about person A: DJ, insinuating that person B: OB1, is self centered, relating to above confusion*

Comedy SILVER!

[OB1]

You sounded like you were confused by what I wrote.

[A Black Falcon]

Oh, how nice. Just great. ALL players MUST HAVE GBAS? DO THEY WANT ANYONE TO BUY THIS THING?

Sure, most people probably have ONE GBA, but THREE or FOUR? They must be nuts!

I thought it'd require one player to use a GBA but the others could use cube controllers... :(

[OB1]

Yeah it's pretty stupid.

[A Black Falcon]

Very, very stupid.

[Great Rumbler]

Very, very, very stupid.

Luckily I have enough GBAs to accomodate this necessity.

[Dark Jaguar]

Square is releasing two games that require way too much, but at least one of them is on the popular system.

First we have this one, nuff said, but then we have FFXI, which has the distinction of requiring a very expensive investment in both a PS2 hard drive and the online adapter.

[Great Rumbler]

First we have this one, nuff said, but then we have FFXI, which has the distinction of requiring a very expensive investment in both a PS2 hard drive and the online adapter.

If FFXI is good enough I might consider getting the online adapter AND paying the monthly bill, but there's no way I'm shelling out even more money to get the hard drive. That's just insane.

[OB1]

If the monthly fee is less than $7 a month I might get the PC version. But just a penny more and there's no way I'm getting it.

[Dark Jaguar]

And there's more. In Japan FFXI already has an expansion, for PS2 and PC. It's "Visions of Ziggerat" or something like that. It adds stuff like summoning class and summons and items and such. I have no idea how popular that game is there, but I'll say this. Despite claims to the counter, PC is a popular format for gaming in Japan. It's just that individual games sell just as badly on PC there as they do here, so they never blip on the radar unless it's PC specific, just like here.

The PC version is by far the cheaper version to get, that is if you already have a very powerful PC. The question is if the controls suffer on PC. For me, the PC version, if I get any version, seems the best choice. It's fortunate that the PC and PS2 versions both use the same server, so everyone can link up just fine.