Xenoblade Chronicles X

[the8thark]

That's good to know. I guess people really love the art pictures in the guides, can't say I blame ya. Yeah, some game guides are short like that. I hope you get it too. So your saying that it was a let down, like Galaxy 2? No thanks. Oh and nice Meme!

If you are hoping I get the XCX guide . . . you have no fear. That is already pre-ordered. 20% discount on game guides when you also preorder the same game at EB games. This makes the guides a little less over priced. So I will get the game (PAL CE) and the guide on Saturday morning (released on the 5th in Australia, so it makes it almost the same time as NA on the 4th). But I will not be able to play much at all till Monday as I am visiting a friend for the weekend before he goes overseas.

Nice SMG2 joke The SMG2 guide was nice. Just compated to the SMG1 guidebook, no added art section (like the SMG1 guide had), 100 less pages in the guide, the green star section was almost 100% wrong in the guide, most likely the guide writer played a unreleased version of the game that was edited after but before launch. And some of the pictures of boss fights in the guide were wrong. As in the goide would say you are fighting X boss but the in game screenshot of it in the guide would be of a totally different boss. Still even after all this, the guide overall is not bad and will help you beat the game . . . well everything except the final grandmaster galaxy star. That star is purely luck and skill. 5 large areas, only 1 health point and no checkpoints. I tried and could not do it.

SMG1 only had one issue. The last star in the game is not mentioned anywhere in the game. That is the one you access after beating the game 100%, 2x, once with Mario and once with Luigi. The reviewer probably never beat the game again with Luigi. Apart from that an amazing game guide.

***************************

Getting back on topic I am not sure if the DLC will be in the XCX guide. It might as it's not really DLC for us. It's just more game content. I am pretty sure most players don't even know content in the game was DLC. I surely don't. I will look it up though.

I will flip through the guide book when I get it. But just a quick browse. I will not study it unless a collection quest loot piece can't be found, or a single boss keeps kicking my team's collective ass. I think XCX really promotes discovery. Knowing it all before hand would just ruin this discovery aspect. It does not matter if I get lost for an hour. The scenery and things to kill are so nice that being lost did not matter. Well that's how I felt in XC. I would assume the same is true in XCX. This did make me a little over levelled in XC but I am ok with that. I like taking it slow and over levelling areas. That's just how I play. Others like speed running or low levelling RPGs. Different strokes for different folks.

Yeah that meme is doing the rounds now and I thought it was cool too.

To begin I'd like to state some points.

1. I'm not too sure how this turned into a XCX vs FO4 argument. It was one game in a list of RPG's I said I played. Not once did I say Fallout 4 was flawless or that it was a better game than XCX.
2. Not once did I say that XCX was a bad game. I said that I was on the fence about buying it and the reviews have pointed out some things that I was afraid of, therefore helping me make the decision not to purchase the game.
3. None of you have played XCX yet and I take it none of you have played fallout yet you compare the two and call it fact that one is better than the other. These "facts" are based on conjecture.
4. I could get in a big pointless pissing match with you guys but it wouldn't have much point to it as none of us have played XCX and only one of us has played fallout 4.

The verdict: I'm having a blast with my game and when you guys get your game you'll probably have a blast with it to, regardless of what other people and reviewers think, no matter how many awards and titles each one wins or doesn't win. Though I do wish you guys had made a stronger case to me to convince me to buy it.

1. FO4 was mentioned here and we ran with it. Comparing the two is obvious as they are two of this year's most hyped releases.
2. True. You did say XCX had many flaws though.
3. Most of us have played FO4. XCX on the other hand you are correct but there is enough people in the game journalism community that have played both. XCX is not better than FO4 (in terms of fun had while playing each game). Both are just very different games. I made a strong case for this above when I compared XCX's and FO4's choices in graphical design/programming and compromises choices. Each game has their own issues to deal with.
4. Yes you could. But it would be a pointless thing to do. But for different reasons though. XCX and FO4 are both role playing games. That's about where the simlarities end though. Everything from the game play style, to the world, to the compromises chosen for game performance to the number of bugs/flaws are all different. It's basically a case of different strokes for different folks. Each game caters to a different audience.

The verdict

We tried our best to give you a strong case to buy XCX . . . but I'll try again now and give you my reasons why you should buy the game.

Take all the reviews into account. Some reviews are unfairly good or unfairly bad about any game. You need to take the overall trend of reviews into account. For XCX the overall trend is very positive for XCX from the critic reviews so far. Of cause this is only a guide and not gospel but it's nice to know.

From everything I have read here is the good, bad and ugly from XCX. To summarise why you should get the game. I say bad and ugly too as no game is perfect and we should try to be as objective as possible.

Summary

XCX as you know is a real time JRPG with well over 100 hours content. The best way I could sell XCX to you would be to say that it seems to immerse almost everyone who plays the game. To the point that they start playing and lost all track of time. They are just having so much fun. Sure the game has a few little flaws/compromises to keep the game play smooth but they are not game breaking and keep the fun there. Fun is why you play video games. XCX has so much fun. Also it's well based fun. You get that sense of achievement after spending time to do something and getting that satisfaction that you have earnt something worthwhile in game, not just handed it to you on a silver platter.

The game is not for everyone. But if you are willing to invest the time into it, you will be rewarded. That's the best thing I can say. It's not like World of Warcraft where the game feels like a 2nd job. You can play for long play sessions or one hour at a time. Monolithsoft made both types of gaming feel rewarding in XCX.

Good

• Huge world size. So large that everything in the distance you can travel to.
• Beautiful looking world. Probably the best on the WiiU. The world is very diverse in it's ecosystems too. A lot of different flora and fauna exist too, each with their own behaviour pattern over the course of the day and night.
• A large amount of player customisation. Your character can play any combat role or have any career role and change them up whenever they want.
• Customisable personal barracks.
• Much reward given to the player for their time invested in the game. Serious time invested in thwe game. Those who want instant gratification with their games need not apply here.
• Can fight on foot or in a huge metal mech or exoskeleton (Skell for short)
• Many combat options
• Almost zero loading screens in the game.
• Player death only sets back your location, meaning you have to track back from the last named location to where you were when you died. Nothing else is lost.
• Disc resale value. If XC Wii is anythin g to go by, the disc will keep it's value for years to come. XC, even today sells for $100+ and that is after XC was re-released on 3DS and put on the WiiU VC. I do think XCX will keep it's resale value should you decide to sell it one day. A complete (no parts missing) collectors edition of XCX (PAL or NTSC) might even increase in value over the coming years.
• Fun and lots of it.

Bad

• A little enemy drop in, in the main city of the game as well as when you travel fast along the ground in a Skell.
• Some of the larger textures are lower res far away and change to high res when you get closer.
• Not a game for those who want instant gratification. You will slowly earn your rewards in XCX and really feel like you earnt them. Players who want to feel "Yay I just beat 1-1 is 25 seconds, I feel great" will feel lost with the massive scale and scope of this game.
• Combat can feel a little repetative. It did in XC on the Wii too for me. . . but this is a flaw of the RPG genre and not XCX. Most RPGs only have the one style of combat for the whole game. XCX though tries to deal with this by the Skells that will feel so different when you fight with them.
• Finding some of the loot for the fetch/find quests can be annoying when it says "X item is on Y continent". Then you realise Y continent will take hours or days to search for the loot item in question. A quick use of an online or printed guide should help this a lot.
• Can't change party members during affiny quests. This is obvious after you realise what affinity quests are but a lot of people are complaining about it. I don't see any issue in this at all but others are.

Most of these bad points are very minor and do not affect the enjoyment of the player. But they do exist so in the excercise of objectivity I felt I should add them in. Some of these flaws are really people who want XCX to be something it is not. That's like saying they want the contents of the tin to be different to what outer label of the tin. Not going to happen. XCX is what it is. No point buying XCX brand baked beans but expecting bananas to be inside the tin when you open it. Bad analogy I know but you get my point.

Ugly

• Time. Something you will loose track of when you are playing XCX. This is a good thing. In a way XCX is a little like Art Academy Atelier. Sure XCX has rewards to work for where Art Academy has almost none. But the similarity is in the joy of playing both games. The main reason you play both games (And XC on Wii as well) is for the fun you have while playing them and doing what the games have to offer. The joy here is in the discovery and learning processes, not in the rewards. XCX is not defined by how many quests you complete or how quickly you can beat the game. Sure they are stats in game but doing this misses the total point of the game. XCX is defined by the time spent having fun just exploring, or being in combat or learning about the planet's inhabitants, or why you survived Earth's destruction when 99.9% of Earth's population did not. This is super fun. If was for me in XC Wii. Not "Yay I just beat that short buy really hard Super Mario Maker level" It's more like, after hours of playing the game you just think to yourself "wow that was amazing". I am aware this is not really ugly at all . . . well apart from all the real world time will be taken up playing XCX if you become really into it.

********************

@Facts About Bok Choy That is the best recommendation, case I can put forward for you to seriously consider purchasing XCX. XCX is not for everyone, but for those who it is for will totally love the game. Do not judge the game based on a few reviews or because a game has a few flaws. Just seriously think "is XCX a game you will enjoy?" "Is it your type of game?" If so you should consider giving it a try. You could to a lot worse than XCX as purchase risk.

 

[Justac00lguy]

This looks like a game I might pick up if I ever get a Wii U. Looks good visually, has a large open world, and it's an RPG. I honestly thought it would score higher than it has, but you guys shouldn't get so caught up in metacritic scores - just enjoy the game itself. The only thing that's ever put me off Xenoblade is that it's a JRPG and I've never liked the way they handle combat. This looks a little bit more accessible though.

No, the two aren't even remotely comparable. One is buggy as all heck (typical of that company) and huge but empty, whereas the other has no reported bugs and is sprawling with wildlife and breathtaking vistas. There is no comparison.

Huh? The game isn't "buggy as hell"; it just has some performance issues in specific areas and these are minor at best. Yes there are glitches, but they are few and far in between that they hardly effect the experience. For some, probably, bugs happen, but it's usually the minority and then they post the bug everywhere so now most people think it's a "buggy mess". I have experienced one minor bug and one large decrease in frame rate over 50 hours of play and most people on Fallout discussion sites are in the same boat. Labeling the game being "buggy is hell" is a shallow view in my opinion just because they're are a few minor glitches and performance issues at launch. Performance probably counts for probably 1% of the overall game.

And Fallout 4 large but empty? What, have you seen the game, watched one video? The game isn't nearly as big as Xenoblade or the Witcher 3 in map size. Fallout, though, is extremely dense. It's a basically a giant city/suburb where there's buildings around every corner that you can go in and explore for a few hours. Fallout is the polar opposite of "empty" lol. It's a 100-200 hour experience, not because you have to travel 10 minutes to get to a location, but because there's tons of content within the world. Enemies around every corner, hundreds of buildings and locations and some take hours to explore individually, then you've got the fact that every item (even junk) is lootable and is actually useful. I'm sure Xenoblade is a 100-200 hour experience also, they just go about exploration in different ways.

---

I don't know why everyone in this thread is getting mad over a metacritic score. Just because it didn't get as good as you expected doesn't mean you should just hate on the competition. Both are probably amazing games in their own ways, if you're going to compare them at least make sure you've played them both to know just a little bit about what you're talking about. It seems the industry is filled with this reliance on a rating and if one game gets higher then let's all jump on the hate train and justify why our game is better. No game is objectively better than the other even if Fallout 4 and the Witcher 3 got a higher score from a reviewer. I've never played Xenoblade, but I'm certainly not going to critique it and say it's worse than Fallout 4 and just blindly hate on it.

 

[Justac00lguy]

Hey just a little suggestion, could we please now put all videos under spoilers... It is making these pages hard to load....

@Facts About Bok Choy
The bad reviews pretty much have as much content as a trailer... Actually.... The Survival guides are way more intensive than Gamespots and Polygon's "reviews". I think it is horrendous however, that you take one or two bad reviews, and ignore the 18 reviews that actually go into detail that explains the game in it's entirety, and judging the game on what it is, rather than what it is not. It is a game for hardcore gamers. Might I add you, that if we go by Metacritic, Xenoblade Chronicles X is tied with Fallout 4
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/fallout-4
http://www.metacritic.com/game/wii-u/xenoblade-chronicles-x

I'm not sure why the PC reviews were so much lower than the console reviews for Fallout 4. Fallout 4 has a 88 and average on consoles though and each have a more accurate score due to a bigger mean average. Anyway, if you guys want a site better than metacritic, go to http://opencritic.com. It takes into account all reviews (regardless of platform) and some lesser known reviews as well (if I recall). It currently has Fallout 4 at a 87 and Xenoblade at a 84. I guess it might not matter for Xenoblade though since it's only on the one console.

 

[the8thark]

I'm not sure why the PC reviews were so much lower than the console reviews for Fallout 4. Fallout 4 has a 88 and average on consoles though and each have a more accurate score due to a bigger mean average. Anyway, if you guys want a site better than metacritic, go to http://opencritic.com. It takes into account all reviews (regardless of platform) and some lesser known reviews as well (if I recall). It currently has Fallout 4 at a 87 and Xenoblade at a 84. I guess it might not matter for Xenoblade though since it's only on the one console.

Have you read the lower than 80 score reviews for FO4 and XCX? Many of them are just bashing both games with extreme bias. Many of the 100 FO4 scores are just blow smoke up FO4's ass as well. There is bias on both ends of the spectrum here.

I think overall these reviews are just a guide. Not gospel. Both FO4 and XCX are great games, in totally different ways. Both are niche games and their respective target audiences will love them. That's all that matters in the end. It's tough to find relatively unbiased reviews these days for any game.

XCX is a special beast though as many reviews either fail to understand what XCX is or are to ignorant to give the time to allow XCX to shine for their reviews and review it in the same way they would review something like Super Mario Maker .
FO4 does not have this issue as most of the critics know what to expect with FO4 and were willing to put the time into the game. They didn't expect instant gratification without working for it, like they did for XCX.

I don't know why everyone in this thread is getting mad over a metacritic score. Just because it didn't get as good as you expected doesn't mean you should just hate on the competition. Both are probably amazing games in their own ways, if you're going to compare them at least make sure you've played them both to know just a little bit about what you're talking about. It seems the industry is filled with this reliance on a rating and if one game gets higher then let's all jump on the hate train and justify why our game is better. No game is objectively better than the other even if Fallout 4 and the Witcher 3 got a higher score from a reviewer. I've never played Xenoblade, but I'm certainly not going to critique it and say it's worse than Fallout 4 and just blindly hate on it.

This is true. Critic scores are 100% subjective. They are just somone's opinion of the game. Some people like to kiss Bethesda's and Nintnedo/Monolithsoft's ass. Others like to hate on one or both companies. That's their perogative and that is totally ok. Everyone has their own opinion. And it shows in these reviews. We are not talking the facts here. The FPS comparison and graphic tech specs do show the facts (even if some gloss some of the facts unfavourable to their arguement). My point is people have different opinions. The reviews for both games prove it. Bias on both sides (praise and hate) for both games exist in abundance for both games. Nothing can be done about it, that is what gaming journalism is. Basically pushing out your own opinions in the form of game reviews and hope others agree with your opinions. Note well I said opinions and not facts.

The most important thing is fun. If a game is fun for you then it is a winner in your eyes and you have gotten your money worth from it. The game critics think it's cool to have their pissing contest about which game is better and which developers ass they can keep kissing so they keep getting the review coopis of games. We are above all that ****. We can think for ourselves. At times the reviews for a game are just a big mess and we have ot take a risk on the game. Some risks pan out and others do not. Nature of the beast I guess. As long as we think a little before we make our game purchases we should be ok.

Critic reviews are becoming less and less a resonable source of game purchasing advice as the years go by. This is a shame. I would like to pick a randonm review and get a resonable opinion. But I have to think always, is this a paid review? Is this a biased review (for or against the game). This is a flaw of the industry, not any specific game. I am not sure anything can be done about it.



This video says the flaws in the industry of critics. Be it food critics or any critics. Applies to game critics just as well.

 

[Justac00lguy]

I definitely agree that there are biased at both ends, I'm sure there's some biased for the high scores for Xenoblade too. Reviewers are as subjective as you or me when it comes to games. I wouldn't agree with the popular notion that reviewers are idiots though. The thing is, reviewers are obviously good at their job and they have a lot of experience over many genres over my generations. I certainly couldn't give a qualified score over multiple genres like some reviewers. The problem arises when big fans of a series are more familiar with the game than the reviewer is. Obviously the fans are heavily biased so anything the reviewer says, that long time fans completely disagree with, the review gets met with tons of hate. Happens with so many games that have a large and loyal fanbase.

I think it's good that a lot of reviewers are generally neutral when it comes to games (some more than others) because big time fans will more so than not over rate their game (I do this and I'm sure most do). Games obviously have certain flaws and the majority, who are not big fans, will probably see the same flaws in a game that the reviewer sees. So most of time, reviews mirror what most will experience. They're not the be all and end all, but they give a good guideline of what the expect for most people's who will buy the game. Saying that though, I don't think reviewers are being intentionally harsh towards Xenoblade more so than other games, just look at the first Xenoblade - it got universal acclaim when the game was virtually unknown and probably alien to a lot of reviewers.

Point really is, reviewers are obviously hired for a reason. Their view does matter and it generally reflects the quality of the game (some of the best games of all time have the highest reviews and the same with the worst). Though the reviewer is most of the time neutral and their opinion is just as subjective as yours or mine. Just because a reviewer doesn't give it a 9/10, it doesn't mean the game isn't a 9/10 to you.

 

[A Link In Time]

This trailer supposedly contains spoilers so watch at your own risk:

 

[Triforce King]

This trailer supposedly contains spoilers so watch at your own risk:

Damn, I wish I never saw it

 

[Triforce King]

 

[the8thark]

Roughly 1 day to go till we have the game. Hype train time.
I will not be able to play the game till monday though, but that is ok. I can live with that. The game will sit at home till then.

 

[Justac00lguy]

Wait the game's not out yet? Why are people mad about the reviews then?

Anyway, if you guys play it, could you give me some feedback on whether this game is accessible to someone who has never played or ever been remotely interested in a JRPG before? I've always been interested in the series, but some aspects kind of put me off.

 

[Ver-go-a-go-go]

I have work from 5:30am to 2pm tomorrow, but I've already paid in full for the preorder and will be picking it up as soon as I get off of work. Will be playing until my body gives up and puts itself to sleep by force, most likely.

Anyway, if you guys play it, could you give me some feedback on whether this game is accessible to someone who has never played or ever been remotely interested in a JRPG before? I've always been interested in the series, but some aspects kind of put me off.

It kind of depends on what puts you off to JRPGs, I'd say. As someone who's been an avid fan of them for a long time (Starting with the traditional Final Fantasy games and working from there), I can already tell you that the most recent two entries in the Xeno series (This one and Xenoblade) have ditched more conventional JRPG elements that have fallen out of favor in recent years.

It's worth noting that this game doesn't relate to any previous one in any way when it comes to plot and setting.

 

[Kylo Ken]

Well, it's done. Xenoblade Chronicles X is the first game I've ever preordered (even though it comes out tomorrow). I hope it lives up to my expectations.

 

[the8thark]

Wait the game's not out yet? Why are people mad about the reviews then?

Anyway, if you guys play it, could you give me some feedback on whether this game is accessible to someone who has never played or ever been remotely interested in a JRPG before? I've always been interested in the series, but some aspects kind of put me off.

If it's anything like Xenoblade Chronicles Wii (XCX is), the game is very accessible. You do not need to know even what a JRPG is to play XC (or XCX well). Both games though will take some time to learn everything and all the game systems. This information/skill is not handed to you on a silver platter. Put the time in, learn it and you'll have a great time.

I do not even like the main series Final Fantasy games at all. I do not like too many other JRPGs a lot either. I like FFCC but that's totally different. This does not stop me from liking XC tons. XC (and XCX to follow it) are their own beasts. Very different from the traditional JRPG.

The short answer to you is yes the game is accessible if you are willing put enough time into it to learn it all.

 

[Triforce King]

Hey everyone, since the game is out now, I went ahead and created a thread so we can exchange Nintendo Network IDs for the online portion of Xenoblade Chronicles X. So please click the link below, and join the group. If you're have any problems joining the group, then please contact me, so I can help get you in. http://zeldadungeon.net/forum/threads/blade-barracks-home-of-the-nintendo-network-ids.54634/

 

[Ronin]

Wait the game's not out yet? Why are people mad about the reviews then?

Yes, there is frustration as to why a number of reviews docked points, as well as the fact that the Game Awards took place the day before XCX's release. So not only was it presented in a more negative light than many people felt it should be (comments in the reviews), but it was effectively cut out of the running for even a single award. The latter felt especially staged.

Too bad that Fallout 4 didn't win Game of the Year, by the way. It wouldn't be my first pick, but I'd take it over Witcher 3 any day. The list of complaints I have against it reaches miles longer than things "buggy" and "empty". ;P

Anyway, if you guys play it, could you give me some feedback on whether this game is accessible to someone who has never played or ever been remotely interested in a JRPG before? I've always been interested in the series, but some aspects kind of put me off.

But of course, and if you have any questions then don't be afraid to ask. Obviously the game isn't for everyone, but hopefully it's something you can get used to and come to appreciate. The combat, for example, takes a while to master but yet will feel extra rewarding once the effort pays off. What are some of the aspects that you can't get into?