I put almost 60 hours into the game because I really enjoyed the gameplay. But I really disliked the story, and never grew to like the characters. Each of the chapters seem more like story synopses rather than an actual story. When they openly aped my favorite FInal Fantasy scene accompanied with the kind of hackneyed writing that Rise of the Skywalker might be embarrassed by, I called it quits and haven’t looked back. If you don’t dig the opening chapters then you probably won’t like the later ones any better.
The soundtrack is dope though.
"disliked the story" is kind of weird because there are 8 separate stories in the game. Some way stronger than others. You literally didn't like a single one of them? There's something there for everyone IMO.
imo, a strong RPG has both a good central story and strong character stories (and side plots, etc). Lots of RPGs do this.
Octopath just does the character stories. It does them well, but it means that the "game's" story is basically entirely lacking.
Gotcha. I absolutely preferred the bite sized stories for myself. I suppose that means the "game's" story is nonexistant but I guess it didn't really matter to me because I understood that each story was about that character and that character alone.
Yeah, I'm glad a lot of people were able to enjoy and appreciate that enough, even if it wasn't really my cup of tea. It's a charming game, so I want it to be successful
It’s interestinng. Many RPGs start out with the party being random strangers whose paths just so happen to converge because they’re going to the same places, and they ultimately turn into a permanent team due to some larger threat or goal that goes beyond their original ambitions. Octopath is basically just that first part, without a larger threat making them a permanent party. It’s not terrible, but it definitely feels like an act 1, you know?
Octopath does have a grand, overarching narrative, to be fair; you just don't start to actually see it come together until the post-game. Which is certainly a decision that was made.
Octopath does have a grand, overarching narrative, to be fair; you just don't start to actually see it come together until the post-game. Which is certainly a decision that was made.
Yeah I never saw it myself. I loved the game a whole lot but after I finished the story for everyone I was pretty ready to move on.
Octopath does have a grand, overarching narrative, to be fair; you just don't start to actually see it come together until the post-game. Which is certainly a decision that was made.
Yeah secret, optional, post-game content doesn't really count for this imo.
silence1186Character shields down!As a wingmanRegistered Userregular
So I made the loop and recruited everyone. From a convenience stand point I like Cyrus, who detects enemy weaknesses. If I want a party that can perform all Path actions, this sidelines Alfin, and makes Ophelia my healer of choice, shutting out Primrose. Therion is my leader, so Tressa is odd girl out, and my main choice is Olberic vs. Haanit.
Also Primrose's story was so much darker than anyone else's, my gods.
Olberic is an extraordinarily strong front line, especially when multi-classed as an Apothecary. I ended up equipping him with Support Skills (Vim and Vigor) and Gear (Battle-Tested Shield, Veteran's Helm, etc) that regenerated HP every turn, along with as much Physical / Elemental Defense as I could manage. Dude was a 1v1 God, and basically unkillable. Super fun.
I think I'm the only person who quit the game due to the combat.
Don't get me wrong - I think it's a phenomenal system for boss battles. Juggling weaknesses, enemy turn order, your own turn order, etc. makes boss battles really engaging.
The problem, like with so many other games, is with random encounters. The battle system just makes random encounters such a chore. Instead of holding A to win, you're going through the same 4-5 steps to break enemies and kill them as efficiently as possible. Which is so boring and time consuming.
Octopath should be essentially a boss rush game with more puzzles/quests requiring the use of Path abilities. Lean hard into the unique mechanics and ditch random encounters. They're never fun, so why have them, let alone make them take 2x-3x longer than other SE RPG random encounters?
I think I'm the only person who quit the game due to the combat.
Don't get me wrong - I think it's a phenomenal system for boss battles. Juggling weaknesses, enemy turn order, your own turn order, etc. makes boss battles really engaging.
The problem, like with so many other games, is with random encounters. The battle system just makes random encounters such a chore. Instead of holding A to win, you're going through the same 4-5 steps to break enemies and kill them as efficiently as possible. Which is so boring and time consuming.
Octopath should be essentially a boss rush game with more puzzles/quests requiring the use of Path abilities. Lean hard into the unique mechanics and ditch random encounters. They're never fun, so why have them, let alone make them take 2x-3x longer than other SE RPG random encounters?
You can reduce the chance of random encounters, fyi.
True, akjak, but that doesn't completely solve the problem.
Of course, random encounters are one of my gaming pet peeves. I'll tolerate them for cool moments or a good story, but I ultimately feel that combat should be meaningful and interesting. If it's not, then why force the player to do it? There's plenty of other, more engaging ways to grant players EXP, money, items, and gear.
It's tricky. On the one hand, encounters before bosses can be a way to train you to deal with new threats/get good at using new skills before the larger test of a boss fight. In that sense, it makes more sense to have a smaller, possibly even limited, number of encounters so that the practice sets in but doesn't wear thin. On the other hand, encounter rates/placements can also be designed as a test of endurance/resource management, with the difficulty coming from getting to the bigger fights without running out of resources by fighting efficiently. There's some of both in Octopath; the way that encounters use the same break system as bosses incentivizes you to build a team that can exploit it well before you get to the next big challenge, for instance.
But those two idea kinda come into conflict (if you figured out your new tricks, but there's still over a dozen fights between you and the boss fight, it can wear really thin. Or a boss can feel cheap if you haven't had enough time to figure things out, or the encounters didn't have anything to do with the boss's strategies), so it can be real tough to do things in a way that works for everyone.
I got through random encounters by nuking everything with Cyrus. He wasn't my main (Therion was), but he never left my party. Just push his magic attack stat as high as you can and blow everything up. Carried me all the way up to the post-game stuff.
I think I'm the only person who quit the game due to the combat.
Don't get me wrong - I think it's a phenomenal system for boss battles. Juggling weaknesses, enemy turn order, your own turn order, etc. makes boss battles really engaging.
The problem, like with so many other games, is with random encounters. The battle system just makes random encounters such a chore. Instead of holding A to win, you're going through the same 4-5 steps to break enemies and kill them as efficiently as possible. Which is so boring and time consuming.
Octopath should be essentially a boss rush game with more puzzles/quests requiring the use of Path abilities. Lean hard into the unique mechanics and ditch random encounters. They're never fun, so why have them, let alone make them take 2x-3x longer than other SE RPG random encounters?
Nah. I despised the combat too, but I didn't like... well, almost anything about the game but the aesthetic and maybe the writing.
I reject the idea that regular encounters can't be fun though. It is something that a lot of RPGs struggle with. Action RPGs in particular tend to do it better because you're more frequently getting new toys that you need to familiarize yourself with. Turn based ones tend to have an issue with a lot of skills, particularly buffs/debuffs, being grossly inefficient for short fights.
It's tricky. On the one hand, encounters before bosses can be a way to train you to deal with new threats/get good at using new skills before the larger test of a boss fight. In that sense, it makes more sense to have a smaller, possibly even limited, number of encounters so that the practice sets in but doesn't wear thin. On the other hand, encounter rates/placements can also be designed as a test of endurance/resource management, with the difficulty coming from getting to the bigger fights without running out of resources by fighting efficiently. There's some of both in Octopath; the way that encounters use the same break system as bosses incentivizes you to build a team that can exploit it well before you get to the next big challenge, for instance.
But those two idea kinda come into conflict (if you figured out your new tricks, but there's still over a dozen fights between you and the boss fight, it can wear really thin. Or a boss can feel cheap if you haven't had enough time to figure things out, or the encounters didn't have anything to do with the boss's strategies), so it can be real tough to do things in a way that works for everyone.
I think FF XIV is an example of what I'm talking about done right. The core of the game is group content - dungeons, trials, and raids. The various boss fights build upon one another. There are mechanics in the latest expansion that go all the way back to A Realm Reborn six years ago. There's also some new things. So, yeah, it's totally possible to have boss fights that teach mechanics while also adding a new wrinkle or two.
What I like about the way that game does it is that the fights matter to what's happening in the story. Being a MMO there's obviously no random encounters, but the game's emphasis is on story-based content and not just killing random, respawning monsters in the world. They simply exist as a nuisance until the player unlocks flying in that zone, and can be avoided pretty easily with a mount. They don't give good EXP, and they never drop gear. The boss fights fit my criteria of being meaningful (in the context of the story) and interesting (mechanics). I don't see why single player RPGs can't borrow that kind of encounter design.
So for Chapter 2, just do them in difficulty order?
Primrose 21, Therion 22, Ophelia 23, etc.
Or should I explore the mini dungeons in most of the chapter 1 traverses?
I'd explore whatever you passed that was too hard for you previously. Especially with Therion as your lead they usually have some good loot in there. Just save outside just in case the cave is too hard for you.
So for Chapter 2, just do them in difficulty order?
Primrose 21, Therion 22, Ophelia 23, etc.
Or should I explore the mini dungeons in most of the chapter 1 traverses?
Make sure you hit each shrine for the extra jobs, and then get to new towns and update your gear. If your gear is updated, you'll be able to tackle the chapters way below the advised levels.
League of Legends: Sorakanmyworld
FFXIV: Tchel Fay
Nintendo ID: Tortalius
Steam: Tortalius
Stream: twitch.tv/tortalius
Holding A to win sounds like an idle game with extra steps though. I'd rather each fight require some thinking.
There is thinking in that situation too though. It's that healing in between battle and/or rarely is the most efficient way to get through things. The resource (or time) cost of hauling out your summons or AoE skills or whatever isn't worth it. Like you can curbstomp virtually every random encounter in FFX with Yuna's summons, but christ, dealing with those animations every thirty seconds would be torture, so nobody does that.
There's definitely a balance that needs to be struck where the player is making decisions both knowingly and that matter, and every single encounter isn't arduous and mentally exhausting. Of course, if you can make the gameplay fun and satisfying to engage with, you end up with a lot more leeway on both sides.
Holding A to win sounds like an idle game with extra steps though. I'd rather each fight require some thinking.
There is thinking in that situation too though. It's that healing in between battle and/or rarely is the most efficient way to get through things. The resource (or time) cost of hauling out your summons or AoE skills or whatever isn't worth it. Like you can curbstomp virtually every random encounter in FFX with Yuna's summons, but christ, dealing with those animations every thirty seconds would be torture, so nobody does that.
There's definitely a balance that needs to be struck where the player is making decisions both knowingly and that matter, and every single encounter isn't arduous and mentally exhausting. Of course, if you can make the gameplay fun and satisfying to engage with, you end up with a lot more leeway on both sides.
Then what game would you say hits the balance? In OT, once you know the weakness of the mobs, it's a matter of finding the quickest way to exploit it. Most times your party members have buffs/debuffs that can be used in conjunction with your DD attacks that help end the fights much sooner. I feel like it's essentially FFX without the in-battle switching.
Holding A to win sounds like an idle game with extra steps though. I'd rather each fight require some thinking.
There is thinking in that situation too though. It's that healing in between battle and/or rarely is the most efficient way to get through things. The resource (or time) cost of hauling out your summons or AoE skills or whatever isn't worth it. Like you can curbstomp virtually every random encounter in FFX with Yuna's summons, but christ, dealing with those animations every thirty seconds would be torture, so nobody does that.
There's definitely a balance that needs to be struck where the player is making decisions both knowingly and that matter, and every single encounter isn't arduous and mentally exhausting. Of course, if you can make the gameplay fun and satisfying to engage with, you end up with a lot more leeway on both sides.
Then what game would you say hits the balance? In OT, once you know the weakness of the mobs, it's a matter of finding the quickest way to exploit it. Most times your party members have buffs/debuffs that can be used in conjunction with your DD attacks that help end the fights much sooner. I feel like it's essentially FFX without the in-battle switching.
I've always been a big fan of the systems that resource limit you, but incorporate resource reclamation into the engine itself. Games like Breath of Fire 4 and Mana Khemia do this by making skills expensive to use, but quickly regenerating MP while characters are in the backline AND incorporating switching characters in battle on the fly as a seamless part of the engine. And every battle begins you with a slightly different configuration of characters and your limited resources based on where you were in your rotation from the last one.
A lot of turn based RPGs adopt a similar kind of thing where normal encounters are a bleed of your resources without reliably being able to replenish them before a boss. This is an approach taken by Persona and many of the Atelier games, but that's also why getting to the point where you can remove the resource crunch completely trivializes the games. You could also argue that the Pokemon games operate this way, that you're running a balance between using your best dudes/moves to get stronger, versus the ones that you'll need to power up for a later challenge. They're... really not resource limited at all though, so unless you're running a Nuzlocke or some kind of very spartan randomizer, that's a much less convincing case.
Octopath doesn't hit the same level as Persona for a number of reasons. It doesn't reward good behavior (ie hitting weaknesses) to anywhere near the same level, it punishes NOT taking the max/min approach rather than the real-time approach much more, battles take much longer in general, there's a shitload more of them, they're totally unavoidable if you're sick of them, etc etc. This is on top of the style and presentation just plain not making them anywhere near as much fun to engage with on a visceral level.
I appreciate the response and I'm not trying to be antagonistic! I disagree with you when you say it doesn't reward good behavior. In Persona you have to find the enemy's weakness and exploit in order to do the All Out attack and (hopefully) finish them off. This required a very specific setup though (knowing what the weakness is, having a Persona equipped that can handle it, having enough MP to do the attack you need). In OT you're limited by your BP (trying to remember this from when I played it) in order to charge your attacks to guard break (again, forgetting term here... might be something different.. I apologize my memory isn't as good as it used to). So if they had 3 and you charged 3 then you could break their guard which causes them to get stunned and take more damage from all attacks.
So if you get the increased BP at the start of a fight, defend to build up more BP, use a teammate to buff you and then a teammate to debuff the enemies it was very easy to blitz through the fights. Of course all dependent on AGI stats and whatnot..
Damn it now I want to play OT again (even though I loathed the post-game idea).
I didn't say it doesn't reward good behavior. It doesn't reward good behavior ENOUGH. In Octopath, you get a damage buff against them, and they're stunned for a turn. Even generic enemies are likely to recover from it before you kill them. In Persona, you got an extra turn, possibly an extra assist attack, a damage buff against them, potentially a stun, a massive damage nuke for hitting it on all of them (or interrogation/reward sequence in Persona 5), plus the special animations as an extra attaboy for the all-out attack, assist attacks, and even knocking them down.
Octopath also never resource limited you like Persona since it's constantly doling out free full heals every time you level up.
I also despise BP as a mechanic, here, in Bravely Default, and in all the Idea Factory games that did it too, cause they fucking LOVED that concept in the PS2/3 era especially. All it adds to normal battles is asking the player to memorize damage/HP for mobs so you don't over-save it or over-spend it, and for boss battles, invariably pushes you towards always stocking up until full to maximize it. It's not as godawful as the dozen or so Idea Factory games that are built on a similar pass-a-turn-and-then-take-two schtick since it doesn't result in combat turns that take literally multiple minutes to resolve, but it's not satisfying or engaging to me either.
That is 100% fair. I apparently missed out on those games back in those times. BP in OT was one of the first times I ran into it as a mechanic. I think I liked it. Sacrifice a turn for potentially more damage in return.
The best part is when you start learning tricks to get turns through other methods. Such as the Merchant skill Share BP or those mixes Alfyn can make.
I can understand the BP system being annoying in Four Heroes of Light; there, IIRC, your energy didn't reset after battles, meaning that you might be screwed if you spent a lot on one battle. Bravely Default, I liked it more, because you could have the whole team go into a deep deficit in order to do a whole bunch of attacks to make sure that a fight ends, and then have your BP back for the next fight. It becomes a problem if you do that and don't kill, but at least you're not screwed if you do win either. And again, I feel like it starts to shine more when you get support abilites that let you get more or spend fewer turns under certian conditions.
The first time I really remember seeing it and being annoyed by it was The Seventh Saga, an SNES game. It had a mechanic where if you defended, the next turn, you would do like 1.75-2.5x damage. Instead of being an extra strategy option, all it really did was make basic attacking more complex, irritating, and time consuming.
0
Options
silence1186Character shields down!As a wingmanRegistered Userregular
So I recruited everyone, made a loop to all the starting towns again with the full set of Steal/Challenge/Guide/Inquire, and cleared all the Level 15 optional dungeons (Woodlands, Flatlands, and Highlands) as well as one Level 20 dungeon (Sunlands). I have two more left (Riverlands and Clifflands), then a Level 25 dungeon in Snowlands. I think the Level 45 dungeon in Coastlands will remain out of reach for a while.
My plan after that is Primrose's chapter 2, which has the lowest danger level. Any other comments/thoughts?
Posts
Gotcha. I absolutely preferred the bite sized stories for myself. I suppose that means the "game's" story is nonexistant but I guess it didn't really matter to me because I understood that each story was about that character and that character alone.
3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
Steam profile
Yeah I never saw it myself. I loved the game a whole lot but after I finished the story for everyone I was pretty ready to move on.
Yeah secret, optional, post-game content doesn't really count for this imo.
3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
Steam profile
But literally every time I see this thread jump to the top of the forum, my heart leaps, hoping that there's news of Octopath 2.
They kind of went radio silent on BDII. Supposed to be coming out by years end.
Anything that comes out as scheduled this year was all but finished by March.
Don't get me wrong - I think it's a phenomenal system for boss battles. Juggling weaknesses, enemy turn order, your own turn order, etc. makes boss battles really engaging.
The problem, like with so many other games, is with random encounters. The battle system just makes random encounters such a chore. Instead of holding A to win, you're going through the same 4-5 steps to break enemies and kill them as efficiently as possible. Which is so boring and time consuming.
Octopath should be essentially a boss rush game with more puzzles/quests requiring the use of Path abilities. Lean hard into the unique mechanics and ditch random encounters. They're never fun, so why have them, let alone make them take 2x-3x longer than other SE RPG random encounters?
You can reduce the chance of random encounters, fyi.
Twitch: akThera
Steam: Thera
3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
Steam profile
Of course, random encounters are one of my gaming pet peeves. I'll tolerate them for cool moments or a good story, but I ultimately feel that combat should be meaningful and interesting. If it's not, then why force the player to do it? There's plenty of other, more engaging ways to grant players EXP, money, items, and gear.
But those two idea kinda come into conflict (if you figured out your new tricks, but there's still over a dozen fights between you and the boss fight, it can wear really thin. Or a boss can feel cheap if you haven't had enough time to figure things out, or the encounters didn't have anything to do with the boss's strategies), so it can be real tough to do things in a way that works for everyone.
Nah. I despised the combat too, but I didn't like... well, almost anything about the game but the aesthetic and maybe the writing.
I reject the idea that regular encounters can't be fun though. It is something that a lot of RPGs struggle with. Action RPGs in particular tend to do it better because you're more frequently getting new toys that you need to familiarize yourself with. Turn based ones tend to have an issue with a lot of skills, particularly buffs/debuffs, being grossly inefficient for short fights.
When those extra steps are the difference between FF 1-10 and 12/13, I'll take 'em.
Alright I guess. Holding A to win sounds like the combat was watered down into nonsense. Why even have combat at that point? lol
I think FF XIV is an example of what I'm talking about done right. The core of the game is group content - dungeons, trials, and raids. The various boss fights build upon one another. There are mechanics in the latest expansion that go all the way back to A Realm Reborn six years ago. There's also some new things. So, yeah, it's totally possible to have boss fights that teach mechanics while also adding a new wrinkle or two.
What I like about the way that game does it is that the fights matter to what's happening in the story. Being a MMO there's obviously no random encounters, but the game's emphasis is on story-based content and not just killing random, respawning monsters in the world. They simply exist as a nuisance until the player unlocks flying in that zone, and can be avoided pretty easily with a mount. They don't give good EXP, and they never drop gear. The boss fights fit my criteria of being meaningful (in the context of the story) and interesting (mechanics). I don't see why single player RPGs can't borrow that kind of encounter design.
Primrose 21, Therion 22, Ophelia 23, etc.
Or should I explore the mini dungeons in most of the chapter 1 traverses?
I'd explore whatever you passed that was too hard for you previously. Especially with Therion as your lead they usually have some good loot in there. Just save outside just in case the cave is too hard for you.
Make sure you hit each shrine for the extra jobs, and then get to new towns and update your gear. If your gear is updated, you'll be able to tackle the chapters way below the advised levels.
FFXIV: Tchel Fay
Nintendo ID: Tortalius
Steam: Tortalius
Stream: twitch.tv/tortalius
There is thinking in that situation too though. It's that healing in between battle and/or rarely is the most efficient way to get through things. The resource (or time) cost of hauling out your summons or AoE skills or whatever isn't worth it. Like you can curbstomp virtually every random encounter in FFX with Yuna's summons, but christ, dealing with those animations every thirty seconds would be torture, so nobody does that.
There's definitely a balance that needs to be struck where the player is making decisions both knowingly and that matter, and every single encounter isn't arduous and mentally exhausting. Of course, if you can make the gameplay fun and satisfying to engage with, you end up with a lot more leeway on both sides.
Then what game would you say hits the balance? In OT, once you know the weakness of the mobs, it's a matter of finding the quickest way to exploit it. Most times your party members have buffs/debuffs that can be used in conjunction with your DD attacks that help end the fights much sooner. I feel like it's essentially FFX without the in-battle switching.
3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
Steam profile
I've always been a big fan of the systems that resource limit you, but incorporate resource reclamation into the engine itself. Games like Breath of Fire 4 and Mana Khemia do this by making skills expensive to use, but quickly regenerating MP while characters are in the backline AND incorporating switching characters in battle on the fly as a seamless part of the engine. And every battle begins you with a slightly different configuration of characters and your limited resources based on where you were in your rotation from the last one.
A lot of turn based RPGs adopt a similar kind of thing where normal encounters are a bleed of your resources without reliably being able to replenish them before a boss. This is an approach taken by Persona and many of the Atelier games, but that's also why getting to the point where you can remove the resource crunch completely trivializes the games. You could also argue that the Pokemon games operate this way, that you're running a balance between using your best dudes/moves to get stronger, versus the ones that you'll need to power up for a later challenge. They're... really not resource limited at all though, so unless you're running a Nuzlocke or some kind of very spartan randomizer, that's a much less convincing case.
Octopath doesn't hit the same level as Persona for a number of reasons. It doesn't reward good behavior (ie hitting weaknesses) to anywhere near the same level, it punishes NOT taking the max/min approach rather than the real-time approach much more, battles take much longer in general, there's a shitload more of them, they're totally unavoidable if you're sick of them, etc etc. This is on top of the style and presentation just plain not making them anywhere near as much fun to engage with on a visceral level.
So if you get the increased BP at the start of a fight, defend to build up more BP, use a teammate to buff you and then a teammate to debuff the enemies it was very easy to blitz through the fights. Of course all dependent on AGI stats and whatnot..
Damn it now I want to play OT again (even though I loathed the post-game idea).
Octopath also never resource limited you like Persona since it's constantly doling out free full heals every time you level up.
I also despise BP as a mechanic, here, in Bravely Default, and in all the Idea Factory games that did it too, cause they fucking LOVED that concept in the PS2/3 era especially. All it adds to normal battles is asking the player to memorize damage/HP for mobs so you don't over-save it or over-spend it, and for boss battles, invariably pushes you towards always stocking up until full to maximize it. It's not as godawful as the dozen or so Idea Factory games that are built on a similar pass-a-turn-and-then-take-two schtick since it doesn't result in combat turns that take literally multiple minutes to resolve, but it's not satisfying or engaging to me either.
I can understand the BP system being annoying in Four Heroes of Light; there, IIRC, your energy didn't reset after battles, meaning that you might be screwed if you spent a lot on one battle. Bravely Default, I liked it more, because you could have the whole team go into a deep deficit in order to do a whole bunch of attacks to make sure that a fight ends, and then have your BP back for the next fight. It becomes a problem if you do that and don't kill, but at least you're not screwed if you do win either. And again, I feel like it starts to shine more when you get support abilites that let you get more or spend fewer turns under certian conditions.
My plan after that is Primrose's chapter 2, which has the lowest danger level. Any other comments/thoughts?