8th November 2005, 9:35 AM
http://www.gamespot.com/gba/rpg/finalfan...id=6139352
Now, I actually managed to glean some information from this wishy washy standard karp.
The main problem I tend to have with big name review sites is they don't give people the details they are actually WANTING, the stuff they don't know but want to know. They just repeat the same stuff about things we already know, but in detail. I really wish they would answer questions like "is this based on the original Japanese, or did they screw up and bring the US SNES version to GBA?". Well, from what they have said, I gather it's the original unaltered gameplay, since Cecil doesn't have "dark magic" in the US SNES version.
They don't tell us anything about the translation, at least nothing I'm not second guessing. They state it has the "same broken translation" as the original. However, they ALSO stated that the dark magic was just like the original. Since the Japanese version was NOT in English, I really don't think that's the original they are talking about. I believe they read half a page about the translating differences between the US and Japanese versions, then played the PS1 version, and are now basically "faking it". I don't even think they realize the PS1 version was completely retranslated and restored the lost Japanese things to the game.
That said, I have my doubts on a lot of the info there.
They DO state that the artwork of the game has been overhauled to a small extent. Not FF3 level mind you, but good enough I suppose. I suspect it's the same changes they made to the wonderswan color's visuals, but of course I only guess that because it would be the easiest path to take.
Anyway, now to rant. These guys are too afraid to actually state an opinion! They dance around every little aspect of the game as though it's ALL a grey area that you could love or hate. They even defend what they think is the original translation, which they at least know is unpopular, by saying "well, maybe purists will be pleased". What purists? Purists want it in Japanese, not in a broken translation. Perhaps you should check the personality of a purist, what it means. I myself want the next best thing, an accurate English translation.
They do this with everything, like "lots of random battles, but hey XP". Not once do they ever risk commiting the sin of having an actual opinion. Of what use can scoring even be in a situation like this? Well, it's not as though ratings below a 5 even really exist at these places... It's really just a 1-6 scale only more like 5-10. Still, has it become so bad? Have the fanboy's complaints become so thunderous that they have no choice but to just completely toss any sort of actual reviewing process out the window in favor of just pandering to both "sides", even when one side likely doesn't even exist? Well, the real news does this too. They claim they are being purely objective (well, in the case of a game review site, I don't really want purely objective all the time, but if they go that way, stop scoring games completely then, either get in the pool or go home, but I digress... from my digression), and in reality it's actually just an attempt to not take sides, even if it means boosting up a logically failed argument just to give the appearence it's on equal footing with something sound, pretending there's a debate when really one side has all the evidence and the other has nothing.
Now, I actually managed to glean some information from this wishy washy standard karp.
The main problem I tend to have with big name review sites is they don't give people the details they are actually WANTING, the stuff they don't know but want to know. They just repeat the same stuff about things we already know, but in detail. I really wish they would answer questions like "is this based on the original Japanese, or did they screw up and bring the US SNES version to GBA?". Well, from what they have said, I gather it's the original unaltered gameplay, since Cecil doesn't have "dark magic" in the US SNES version.
They don't tell us anything about the translation, at least nothing I'm not second guessing. They state it has the "same broken translation" as the original. However, they ALSO stated that the dark magic was just like the original. Since the Japanese version was NOT in English, I really don't think that's the original they are talking about. I believe they read half a page about the translating differences between the US and Japanese versions, then played the PS1 version, and are now basically "faking it". I don't even think they realize the PS1 version was completely retranslated and restored the lost Japanese things to the game.
That said, I have my doubts on a lot of the info there.
They DO state that the artwork of the game has been overhauled to a small extent. Not FF3 level mind you, but good enough I suppose. I suspect it's the same changes they made to the wonderswan color's visuals, but of course I only guess that because it would be the easiest path to take.
Anyway, now to rant. These guys are too afraid to actually state an opinion! They dance around every little aspect of the game as though it's ALL a grey area that you could love or hate. They even defend what they think is the original translation, which they at least know is unpopular, by saying "well, maybe purists will be pleased". What purists? Purists want it in Japanese, not in a broken translation. Perhaps you should check the personality of a purist, what it means. I myself want the next best thing, an accurate English translation.
They do this with everything, like "lots of random battles, but hey XP". Not once do they ever risk commiting the sin of having an actual opinion. Of what use can scoring even be in a situation like this? Well, it's not as though ratings below a 5 even really exist at these places... It's really just a 1-6 scale only more like 5-10. Still, has it become so bad? Have the fanboy's complaints become so thunderous that they have no choice but to just completely toss any sort of actual reviewing process out the window in favor of just pandering to both "sides", even when one side likely doesn't even exist? Well, the real news does this too. They claim they are being purely objective (well, in the case of a game review site, I don't really want purely objective all the time, but if they go that way, stop scoring games completely then, either get in the pool or go home, but I digress... from my digression), and in reality it's actually just an attempt to not take sides, even if it means boosting up a logically failed argument just to give the appearence it's on equal footing with something sound, pretending there's a debate when really one side has all the evidence and the other has nothing.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)