That’s probably because they didn’t tell you about it. Lack of communication and documentation was one of my biggest gripes in the original VC thread.
This is true. I was being a tad hyperbolic in my last post about the importance of getting A ranks; I didn’t finish the game with straight As. But I did finish the game with a majority of As, with some Bs and maybe a few Cs. I still believe the game would have been a lot harder if I wasn’t getting the upgrades and free royal weapons that came from receiving higher ranks.
How about the major change of going back to larger maps? The scout rush could be an issue in VC; I’m finding it intolerable thus far on VC2’s smaller, interlinked battlefields.
Plus, the “cloth map” that I had such a problem with deciphering when trying to place units in the first game is now even more useless because its smaller! I played a mission in VC2 last night where a key passage was blocked by a steel barrier, but there was no way to see that on the map until after I had deployed most of my soldiers in completely ineffective positions.
Not to mention that VC2 already has several systems in play that would be new to a console version. Give me all of those, return the better storytelling and voice acting, remove those terrible audio emoticons during non-spoken scenes, rethink the scoring system, and bring back the larger more complex maps with clearer labels. That’s certainly enough change to justify a PS3 sequel.
I agree that TBS games are a natural for handheld platforms, and portability was one of the things that I was super excited about for VC2. But since PS3 hardware and software sales haven’t ground to a halt due to gamers’ daily grinds, that’s a pretty silly reason to give for keeping it on PSP.
I don’t really think they can sell a PS3 sequel as new and innovative on the idea that they’re making it just like the first game, as nice as that would be. The actual gameplay changes in VC2 amounted to simple gameplay updates, and they already said they didn’t consider that enough to make a PS3 sequel.
The PSP game is already confirmed to be area-based, but going back to a VC1 style linear storyline instead of the mission-based gameplay of VC2. They’re also doing a story about a conscripted group of soldiers being given suicide missions, so I expect it won’t be of quite the same tone as VC2. They’ve said that the areas will return and be more unique, and considering they’ve ditched the mission-based gameplay, I don’t see any reason to doubt that. The cutscene artwork they show in the Famitsu screenshots looks more like it is going for still pictures instead of bouncing frames, but it’s hard to tell from screenshots.
I don’t know. I’m not much of a VC fan, so it’s rather hard for me to see many problems here. Everything they’ve said about it sounds like they’re trying to fix people’s complaints with VC2 while still keeping it on a handheld.
While I liked the “small cog” feel of being a side-note to the main conflict in VC1 (the main conflict being the Imperial-Alliance or whatever war), I feel like they might be stretching Gallia a little thin by making all the games focus on Gallia instead of focusing on the setting.
I know there’s narrative reasons for making the player’s nation the little scrappy one (relatability, anime convention, ganbare!, etc), but one way they could get back onto the PS3 is to make it bigger by virtue of giving control of the main conflict. Huge armies clashing with larger number of units, etc.
The Death mechanic almost never came up. Partially because folks tend to use the main characters, and partially because the scoring system had you finishing most maps in a very short time, where those deaths are unlikely to happen.
It was in the tutorial somewhere, if i recall correctly.
Because we’ve never seen successful, iterative, evolutionary sequels on consoles before? I get what you’re saying, especially with the less-than-stellar international sales of the first game. But how much of that had to do with poor marketing of an admittedly niche title versus the flaws in the gameplay (read: scoring system, super scouts)? Most reviews ranged from enthusiastic to rapturous, so radically changing the core structure would be counter productive anyway.
And whether or not things like the new class system could be considered minor updates, adding the multiplayer modes to a PSN-enabled PS3 version would be a pretty big addition by itself. So their rationale still seems wonky to me.
It’s pointless to complain, I know, because VC3 is already confirmed for PSP. And, as I said earlier, I really like having a portable version of the series. But I really hope they’re not writing off a PS3 sequel forever. If something as hardcore as Disgaea can live on handhelds and consoles concurrently, surely Valkyria Chronicles can get a little love.
Clearly, you were better at VC than me. :)
You’re probably right, but the tutorial had problems of its own. Namely that it showed you text screens once in the early game when it was throwing a lot of different concepts at you, and then it didn’t make that information accessible again. Or, at least, not that I could find. When Wavy was suddenly gone for good halfway through the game, I scoured both the help system and the manual to see if the death mechanic had been mentioned. I didn’t see anything, so I didn’t feel bad about resurrecting him through my last save.
I do not understand how anyone can actually believe the producer created meme that VC3 needs to be innovative to appear on the PS3. The existence of Sega games with sequel numbers indicates re hashing ideas and putting a HD coat of paint has not been an issue for Sega this generation: Yakuza 3/4, Virtua Fighter 5, Golden axe beast rider. . . Virtua tennis 3, 2009, 2010.
