Sega RPGs: Where's the Respect? [Archive]

Melf

04-04-2006, 12:01 AM

For over two decades, gamers have been quick to associate anyone else but Sega with the RPG genre, citing that there were no memorable titles or laughably, that the Genesis had almost none. Were they to take a closer look, they'd see a catalogue of franchises that are not only top-tier, but also as enduring as anything the competition can muster. So why all the hate? Sega-16 contributor Zack Young tackles the issue in our latest feature Sega RPGs: Where's the Respect (http://www.sega-16.com/2006/04/sega-rpgs-wheres-the-respect/)?

Joe Redifer

04-04-2006, 01:31 AM

I don't remember Phantasy Star 2 being critisized for being too hard simply because it came with the walkthrough book. I remember a lot of mags harping on it because of that. Asses. I remember when Phantasy Star 3 came out I specifically didn't buy it because it didn't have anything to do with Phantasy Star (or at least so it appeared). I eventually purchased the game used, so Sega never got any money from me for that game. They could have been $70 richer if they had stuck with Algol in Phantasy Star 3. And if Phantasy Star 4 had been released in a plastic clamshell box instead of cheap paper I probably would have purchased that brand new as well, so that's $140 or so richer that Sega could have been, and that means that the company would be in a much better position financially, they would still have their own system, and they'd be #1 and Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft would all be bankrupt right now.

Obviously

04-04-2006, 11:06 AM

I don't know. I can see why the SNES ended up being viewed as the console for RPG's in the 16-bit era. It could make games more colorful and you can say RPG's are all about the story but they're also all about the art. They had the big name RPG developers like Square and names like Final Fantasy III/VI and Chrono Trigger are always going to be remembered in the forefront of RPG history.

I'm not a big RPG fan as I've stated many times, and speaking from point of view of a casual RPG gamer, I'm still someone who would probably recommend the SNES over the Genesis when it comes to RPGs. I've been able to play through several SNES RPG's and enjoy them, but every time I've tried to get into the Phatasy Star or Shining series it's always come off as an aquired taste sort of thing to me.

As fanboyish as I am for the Genesis, I've never really found myself defending the RPG aspect. I suppose if that was my genre of choice things would be different.

David J.

04-04-2006, 12:25 PM

I'm not an RPG fan, so it is hard for me also defend the Genesis on that front.

Zebbe

04-04-2006, 01:10 PM

I really enjoy Genesis' RPGs, but Crusader of Centy is probably the worst game I've ever played in the genre. Graphics, music, control... pretty much everything stinks in that game. The story is quite original, but not deep by any means.

Genesis Knight

04-04-2006, 02:28 PM

Since when does someone get to say Beyond Oasis is 'cumbersome and slow-moving' and get to live on? Off with his head! Other than that, it was a solid article that summed up the situation pretty nicely.

Hey Melf, where did you get that neat shot of Crusader of Centy for the main page?

Genesis Knight

04-04-2006, 02:45 PM

D'oh, I found the pic.

Flash1087

04-04-2006, 05:06 PM

I hate to say it, but I was one of those kids.

I played a few in my day (Shining In The Darkness and one or two Phantasy Stars stand out in my mind) but as far as buying Genesis games went, I pretty much stuck with side-scrollers and shmups. When I went for an RPG, it was on my SNES.

Oh, what I missed!

ary incorparated

04-04-2006, 06:35 PM

Nothing ehy.RPGF on genesis are okay,Phantasy star is great i think.Shining wisdom is cool,story of thor looks great,and dont talk about slow when comparing Genesis Knight,it isnt that kind of slow,did i mentioned how fast the dialoges in tales of Phantasia where,please fore health sake i dint start about that,nor the story,else i would be typing it almost the slow while folowing the game.I like Light crusader for its graphics(but i think thats more puzzle) tahts about it not really much wakening.

Obviously

04-04-2006, 07:20 PM

Speaking of Sega RPGs I really liked Skies of Arcadia on the Dreamcast although that coincidentally meets some of the same "too easy" and "too unoriginal" critisisms that the Genesis RPGs did.

j_factor

04-04-2006, 09:13 PM

I think this has more to do with looking backward than anything. I think this reputation is an afterthought, constructed by gamers who came of age on Playstation. They saw Breath of Fire IV, they saw Chrono Cross, they saw Final Fantasy VII, and they looked back at their histories, and it was always SNES. They got into the emu scene, downloaded the ROMs, and got into SNES RPGs posthumously.

Very few Genesis RPGs have sequels. Shining Force III wasn't exactly big at the time, Might & Magic turned into something completely different, and PSO is not a real sequel. Further, the RPG scene for the past several years has been focused on Squaresoft, Enix, and recently Atlus. It's all on jRPGs; ever notice how the only Genesis RPGs that go for a significant sum are Sega's own, and the WD releases for Sega CD? Only retro gaming nuts care at all about the RPGs that EA published.

Genesis didn't really have an anti-RPG reputation in its own day. What changed was the RPG gaming mindset.

kevinski

04-04-2006, 09:32 PM

I absolutely love playing Light Crusader. :)

Anyway, the only 16-bit RPG that I could really consider to be unforgettable is Chrono Trigger. It was absolutely amazing, and I could still play it to this day. In fact, I liked it so much that I got every single possible ending (including all of the variations) at least one time.

Sure, Phantasy Star II is all right, but it simply can't hold my interest. The storyline is rather blah, and the level-up process is far too tedious. In fact, I'd typically forget what I was even supposed to be doing by the time I reached a comfortable level. (That usually meant fighting until I had the best equipment at each new town.)

Demonic Weasel

04-04-2006, 09:37 PM

A fair point. All who were weaned on PS1's came up with the idea that FF7 was the first RPG to have a good story. Although I think that's debatable. And then SF3 and PSO were the two main sequels to Sega. PSO quite deserves to die. As far as I'm concerned though SF3 is God. And it owns any and everything that came out on the damn PSX!

Obviously

04-04-2006, 11:14 PM

I absolutely love playing Light Crusader. :)

Light Crusader makes me cry blood. Why Treasure, why?

Anyway, I think the Playstation comment holds some merit. Though I remember people drooling over Chrono Trigger, Zelda and Earthbound in their Nintendo Power Magazines and taking pot-shots at my Genesis back in the day as well.

GeckoYamori

04-05-2006, 02:02 AM

Further, the RPG scene for the past several years has been focused on Squaresoft, Enix, and recently Atlus.

Bethesda? Bioware? Black Isle?

Obviously

04-05-2006, 08:20 AM

But Squaresoft and Enix are Square-Enix now.

Demonic Weasel

04-05-2006, 10:22 AM

Perhaps that explains why they mostly release half-assed games. Anyway I never understood why PSII was attacked for being too hard. I admit that it was hard to the point that playing was more like a chore than anything else, but that's only at certain points. And it's story blows "Six warriors arrived each one holding an Orb" straight to hell.

Genesis Knight

04-05-2006, 01:03 PM

"I think this has more to do with looking backward than anything. I think this reputation is an afterthought, constructed by gamers who came of age on Playstation. They saw Breath of Fire IV, they saw Chrono Cross, they saw Final Fantasy VII, and they looked back at their histories, and it was always SNES. They got into the emu scene, downloaded the ROMs, and got into SNES RPGs posthumously.

Very few Genesis RPGs have sequels. Shining Force III wasn't exactly big at the time, Might & Magic turned into something completely different, and PSO is not a real sequel. Further, the RPG scene for the past several years has been focused on Squaresoft, Enix, and recently Atlus. It's all on jRPGs; ever notice how the only Genesis RPGs that go for a significant sum are Sega's own, and the WD releases for Sega CD? Only retro gaming nuts care at all about the RPGs that EA published.

Genesis didn't really have an anti-RPG reputation in its own day. What changed was the RPG gaming mindset."

All great points! Especially about the jRPG vs. the EA titles.

j_factor

04-05-2006, 01:05 PM

Bethesda? Bioware? Black Isle?

That's a separate RPG scene. There's the jRPG scene, and then there's that scene. I was really talking about the jRPG people.

The people who are into KOTOR and Neverwinter Nights and such are far less likely to care about any older RPGs. They generally don't play or praise SNES RPGs, so they don't really have any bearing on this Genesis vs. SNES situation.

ary incorparated

04-06-2006, 02:36 PM

no no no,light crusader looked awesome and was animated pretty damn good.I think not one genesis RPG comes close to any snes RPG graphic wise,since snes has more colours.

Demonic Weasel

04-06-2006, 03:20 PM

What do graphics have to do with an RPG anyway? As long as they're not so bad that you can't play you wouldn't be looking for graphics.

Zebbe

04-06-2006, 04:35 PM

I think not one genesis RPG comes close to any snes RPG graphic wise,since snes has more colours.

So Final Fantasy II/IV is better-looking than Phantasy Star IV? And its all about colours?

videolamer

04-06-2006, 06:34 PM

In all honesty, the SNES just had too many classic RPGs for most people to even remember Segas. Final Fantasy 2 and 3, Secret of Mana and Chrono Trigger all on one system. And their second string RPGs tended to be better than games like Fatal Labyrinth, Super Hydlide, Traysia, and Sword of Vermillion.

Although more people need to mock Arcana. It didn't just do the scrolling first person dungeons thing worse than SitD, but it couldn't even best the 8 bit Phantasy Stars.

Alianger

04-06-2006, 07:27 PM

What do graphics have to do with an RPG anyway? As long as they're not so bad that you can't play you wouldn't be looking for graphics.

Well, quite a lot I think since you're not as involved in the action and get more time to look at it. But a good design is much more important than a good color palette.

Joe Redifer

04-06-2006, 07:56 PM

Final Fantasy 2 and 3, Secret of Mana and Chrono Trigger all on one system.

I actually bought Secret of Mana when it came out. I was so bored! I lost all ambition to play the game and eventually traded it in for something entertaining. I rented the Final Fantasys but I thought that their pacing was extremely slow. This is coming from a guy who got piss bored with FF7 as well. In fact, I absolutely hate Final Fantasy games. If you enjoy boredom, you'll enjoy Final Fantasy! Maybe it's not Final Fantasy, maybe it's Square. Yeah, that's it. They're boring (though Chrono Cross entertained me all the way up to the second disc).

Although more people need to mock Arcana. It didn't just do the scrolling first person dungeons thing worse than SitD, but it couldn't even best the 8 bit Phantasy Stars.
Shining in the Darkness' dungeon scrolling wasn't even as good as the 8-bit Phantasy Star. At least the floor and ceiling moved on Phantasy Star. Oh yeah, and it was full screen.

videolamer

04-06-2006, 08:26 PM

Shining in the Darkness' dungeon scrolling wasn't even as good as the 8-bit Phantasy Star. At least the floor and ceiling moved on Phantasy Star. Oh yeah, and it was full screen.

It's all true. Naka was an excellent programmer.

Demonic Weasel

04-06-2006, 08:58 PM

Shining in the Darkness had it's good points though. Nice character artwork, amusing dialogue, and though the story was pretty weak at least the princess wasn't butt-ugly this time.

And I agree that graphics can be important in an RPG, but for me the engrossing part is the story and I honestly couldn't care about the graphics as long as they're bearable.

And after trying some SNES games I was less than impressed. The FF's seemed quite dull to me and Secret of Mana is a little too random. I sort of get into it at times, but it never sticks as I get tired of wandering aimlessly around. Earthbound was interesting, but damn what a wierd game. I quite liked the Lufia's but they move extremely slowy and become tedious quickly. I will say that I do like Chrono Trigger a lot.

But Shining Force, Phantasy Star, Beyond Oasis, Crusader of Centy, Vay, Lunar, Dark Wizard, Popful Mail, Warsong and Hiemdall are still all better.

ary incorparated

04-08-2006, 09:42 AM

If you take the later genesis RPG,s graphically some games on genesis still eat snes games for lunch ey,to much to much for the little snes system,Like phantasy star 4 i was blowing away when eeing the tons of animation,which many snes games lack.But stil the colour presentation is better in most snes RPG,s,here in Holland it was all snes,cause of the presentation of colours and nothing else,animation nope,stf photo alike backgrounds nope etc,only graphics count here.story of thor and shining force 2,but those games dont pack the snes RPG really not esspecially not when talking about graphics.

Obviously

04-08-2006, 10:15 PM

I don't generally think of the Phantasy Star series when I think of smooth animation but then again I didn't really give any of those games a chance.

ary incorparated

04-09-2006, 09:16 AM

Which game do you give a chance when blowing away many snes RPG,which megadrive RPG.or none.

Daria

04-14-2006, 01:58 AM

I thought the article spent too much time pitting the game's against a 10 year out of date fanboy mentality and didn't provide nearly enough information on the games themselves. You're preaching to the choir by telling us that Sega RPGs were underappreciated by the gaming public of their day, we are afterall Sega fans or we wouldn't be posting here. In fact you spend so much focus on the view of the average Nintendite that your writeup come off as negative. I read the editorial and what I remember reading is that Beyond Oasis is slow and cumbersome and that Crusader of Centy was a Zelda knock off featuring fluffy bunnies. You neglected to mention just what qualities make these games the classics we recognize them as being today.

Joe Redifer

04-14-2006, 05:39 AM

In my opinion the features on this site aren't written strictly for those who visit the forum, so I don't think it's "preaching to the choir". Someone curious about the Genesis may stumble upon the site via a search and read a few articles he/she/it finds interesting. They may learn something. That's how I found this site. I read some articles, thought it was cool, and then decided to join the forums and annoy everyone.

ary incorparated

04-14-2006, 08:04 AM

actually its all subjectif.maybe 80% may like zelda,while you like phantasy star.you cant judge a uppinion,since everything sead is actually a uppinion.like link to the past is better then any genesis title.No its else not better,so no comparisment to make.yesterday i played illusion of time for the sne and chrono trigger,maybe harch but i found the graphics for 16 bit not special and not mind min blowing,even illusion of time i didnt see one animation exceptin tyhe character,so animationless.I like snes to,but that it has better RPG,s is taking very strickly in my uppinion.like 20 of the same chrono trigger alike RPG,S aggainst the variety of the likes on gennesis.And story of thor is great and far way not that slow you can run,cant you,and since comparring them to any sne RPG,who is calling story of thor slow then.

Melf

04-14-2006, 01:07 PM

Demonic Weasel

04-14-2006, 01:14 PM

There's also the fact that the reviews here are what are supposed to tell about the games most deeply. And that the majority of Genesis fans would have hopefully tried the games themselves.

Although I allow that it might've been a little too much on the "Preaching to the Choir" side.

ary incorparated

04-14-2006, 03:10 PM

sorry for my typing before,it was a chore while typing it fast.

Obviously

04-14-2006, 04:07 PM

Joe's right. Sega-16 receives between 800-1000 unique visits a day, but that doesn't really translate into forum growth. The site is a historical archive that's meant to educate about the Genesis, and most of our readers aren't forum members...though I wish they were. :p

Hopefully those who read the site decide to join the forums, but there's actually a large number of people who know very little about the Genesis overall.

That's true. Most kids either got the SNES, Genesis, or and very rarely both. Now in the modern age of ROMS and other sources of rediscovering classic gaming people are becomming more curious about the systems that they didn't have when they were younger.

GeckoYamori

04-14-2006, 04:18 PM

Though not in a very large scale. Most people outside of Sega circles still think of it as a console with the Sonic series, maybe a little Phantasy Star, some inferior SNES ports, and that's it. They just naturally assume things without bothering to look for themselves.

Melf

04-14-2006, 04:53 PM

This is a topic bound to come up again when the Revolution's downloadable service begins. We may have to write something about it....

...oh wait! I already did! Look for it next Friday!

j_factor

04-15-2006, 12:40 AM

Most kids either got the SNES, Genesis, or and very rarely both.

I had all three (the third being Turbografx). The one upside to being an only child of divorced parents. :p

Obviously

04-15-2006, 05:36 PM

I had the luxury of playing all of them because my best friend was a spoiled brat who had everything.

ary incorparated

05-04-2006, 05:14 PM

actually im not a RPG man,but i like the ones like story of thor etc,Graphics arent the most impotant things,Landstalker is good without blowing any upper graphically snes rpg of the chair.but for fun when talking about graphics(no fanboyism)compare Star ocean to any RPG on md,i dont know on that comes close except in my uppinion PS4 but maybe lunar silverstar,Eternal blue?.just curious.

GeckoYamori

05-04-2006, 05:32 PM

It's more important to develop RPGs with some actual substance in the game rather than putting all the effort into making more glamorous cutscenes, something japanese developers often tend to forget.

ary incorparated

05-04-2006, 07:03 PM

Theres the point,graphics dont steal the show but that was not my question,which game looks sub par on genesis compared to snes,nothing to do with gameplay or anything,just curious.what you sead is actually the most relevant point i know thats why where playing em for.but my questionb is just what RPG for genesis,mega cd encounters snes ones no fanboyism or what no rivality aggainst any of them just which RPG is a graphic ballad on genesis just me beeing curious about peoples uppinion that may vary.Personally im going with PS4 and shining force 1 looked good as far as i played em,shining in the darkness looked strange but good,Rent a hero(i think its not actually an RPG) is damn fun and looks okay,Lunar eternal blue i think thats an good answer for star,what more.those subject where beeing discussed before like in Btman and robin for MD Gunstar etc,why not once more its intressting for me,if not for you then whele quit about it.