Legend of Heroes: Trails in the Sky Review
When I am reviewing a portable game, I always feel guilty playing any game other than my review subject when I’m on the bus. I hate the feeling that I’m shirking my responsibilities just to get a few extra hours of Monster Hunter in, but this is a rule I probably should have suspended in the case of Legend of Heroes: Trails in the Sky. On two separate occasions, I missed my bus stop, because the game literally puts me to sleep every time. The game’s narrative is derivative and oppressively mundane, and does a tremendous job of hiding an otherwise enjoyable, if not terribly original, JRPG. Although Trails in the Sky bares the Legend of Heroes moniker, it is not directly related to the previous three games that have been released here in the states. Originally developed by Falcom in 2004 for the PC, Trails is actually the first game in the “Sora no Kitseki” trilogy. The series was ported to PSP in 2006, and now, 7 years after its inception and 5 years after the port, the game has washed up on American shores thanks to the same fine folks at XSeed that localized my beloved Ys games.
To say the game feels like a 7 year old game would be taking the easy way out – especially considering that it feels more a like 17 year old game. The characters have the same plasticine shine that epitomized early Sega Saturn games like Shining Force III and Johnny Bazookatone, but that particular style has not aged particularly well. No longer able to impress me with their ability to make sprites from poorly rendered claymation scans, the characters looked as stale as their dialog. The music was also drab and uninspired. One selection from the soundtrack will lull you from one area to the next, not changing until you return to the overworld, which really confuses the tone of each event and place. The environments were, on the other hand, fairly detailed and interesting to explore. Dungeons are varied and challenging, and while I tended to spend as little time as possible in them to avoid idle chitchat, the towns feel much more habitable than your average JRPG burg. The attention to detail really made it feel like my lifeless, generic avatar was in a real place.
If the idea of a generic plot involving a girl and her brother that join a group of elite mercenary adventurers and become intertwined with the destiny of an entire nation seems dull and played out to you, let me warn you: you have no idea what dull is until you’ve actually experienced the uniquely tedious narrative of Trails in the Sky. Thomas Jefferson once said “never use two words when one will do.” This would have been sound advice, as Trails tend to use thirty or forty. Through the vast majority of the game, I felt like I was being held captive by dialog boxes while my party chit-chatted about the most inane subjects in the most round-about way possible. A diatribe about soup could last for 20 minutes, and at no point during that mind-numbing, compulsory conversation will you extract any relevant information about the plot, the characters or the gameplay. Just soup. Of the 40-50 hours of gameplay, expect to spend 30 of them wasted on idle discussion about who-knows-what.
If you take out the exhausting story element, what’s left of the game is actually engaging and even fun, but again, not terribly original. At first glance, the battle system looks like a combination of tactical and turn based battle systems, but I soon realized that the fights were very similar to Grandia II. Player turns are displayed on a timeline, and different commands effect your placement in that timeline differently. A spell may take 2 turns to cast, but your turns may come faster, whereas a regular attack will execute immediately, but you will have to wait longer for your next opportunity. Each character can also charge up a powerful special attack, which can be used at any time to interrupt the flow of turns. Some turn-slots offer effects like healing or a guaranteed critical hits, so managing your place in the timeline can be critical. Although the lack of real-time decision-making removes the tension from similar battle systems, the sheer volume of strategic factors makes for some exciting battles.
The beginning of the 21st century was a tough time for JRPGs: the market was flooded and public interests were changing. It’s no surprise that Trails in the Sky never hit US shores. It would have simply been lost in a hurricane of similarly average titles released around the same time. It could be said that I’m judging this game too harshly, as it was made to compete with the games of 2004, not the titles of today, but even by those standards, this game was hopelessly formulaic and endlessly chatty. Although there are fewer contemporary competitors to choose from nowadays, I would recommend that readers look to their backlog before picking up the latest Legend of Heroes game. If you feel like you don’t already own at least 15 better JRPGs, or if you simply have to complete your collection, then I suppose there are worse ways to spend your money. Otherwise, I would just peruse the PlayStation Store for some cheap classics.
C- WAT?
First, BTW.
First the first time ever, IGN gave a higher review score than you guys and it was deserved. NOLA, from what I have heard you are being way too harsh on the game.
C-‘ed cause someone doesn’t like to read boo-hoo.
Man, I have to disagree. I played the I played the original Japanese version way back when and love it. This is a great jrpg with an amazing story, if you give it time.
Liberl is really big and feels alive, and the battle system is excellent.
Someone doesn’t like a Falcom game? I don’t believe it?
right now lowest score on Metacritic in a 80. NOLA is a hater.
I’m think Deagle should have had a crack at it, or at least one of your two-person reviews.
http://scrubhub.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/9e9e2fc51035015aaf818e5212a7f0fa.jpg
Best thing about the review was the Johnny Bazookatone reference.
RPGFan 88
Gamepro 80
IGN 80
PlayStation LifeStyle 80
Tech-Gaming C-
what’s wrong with this picture?
Weren’t you the one who like Lunar?
Whats the difference here?
Damn, SNOLA really stirred up the hornet’s nest with this one.
Whats the price?
BTW Looked at the IGN review, it really didn’t tell me much at all. It was like the reviewer played for 5-6 hours tops. Myabe less.
How can you not like a game that spells out Loh Tits?
Dude, there’s soo many funny parts of the game like the horny bard. I think you were a bit too harsh.
Sorry, I’ve heard that this has a MASSIVE amount of dialog. If it’s not well written that could be a real pain in the ass.
Thanks, NOLA- Some of us trust you!
seems a bit low for just having a lot of dialog.
I’m thinking that Desert should have handled this one.
You go, NOLA!
The problem is that I DO like to read (I’d be a pretty lousy writer if I didn’t) but I also believe that dialog should have value. There is a lot of dialog in this game that offers little to no insight into the story, the characters or the world, and that just feels like dead weight.
Also, since when is a C- the end of the world? Last I checked, a C- meant “Average – in need of some improvement.” I think that describes this game pretty well: it can hold its own against its contemporaries, but if it got its act together, it could could be much better.
I just think it’s funny that there’s twice as many comments here as there is on IGN.
I see nothing wrong with that picture – 5 different reviewers, some are bound to have a difference of opinion. However, since the point I think you’re trying to make is “NOLA’s score is out of line!” let me break it down:
International standard is that a “C” score is anything between a 74 and 81 – 74 being a C-, 81 being a C+(I realize a lot of schools use the 90-100 scale now, but humor me – my schools all used the standard scale). Even though we don’t use number grades here at tech-gaming, the inclusion of a minus symbol makes it pretty easy to tell that I would have given it a 74 if we did.
80-74= 6point difference in scores.
88-80= 8point difference in scores.
by your logic, RPGFan’s score was more divergent from the median score than my C-
OR
We can look at the mean score, which would be an 80.4, at which point, I am still only 6.4 points away.
I’m not saying RPGFan’s score was wrong, either, I’m just saying that the argument of “this review isn’t the same as the other reviews” argument is pretty silly. If there were one authoritative reviewer, then there wouldn’t be any need for sites like Tech-Gaming, would there?
So smary-pants, what the standard deviation of review scores? HAHA
Your statement in 92.47% accurate 😉
72-70% is a pretty typical C-
75 would be the midpoint with a three point range in either direction, righto?
Number are great and all- except for interpreting what a 8.5 means 😉
A C- lets me know that the game is SLIGHTLY lower than average. But, I don’t think people are arguing with the system, they are trolling for a game they probably haven’t played yet.
And why didn’t you guys review Dragon Age II?
epic fail review.
I’m about 10 hours in and really like LoH. Its much better than most jrpgs and the conversations are the point. duh.
They seem so lifelike and detailed. If you actually play the game youd see that the world is really detailed just as much as any ps3 game and sometimes more.
Thanks for the review Sean. I’m happy that you presented a slightly different opinion on the game.
In 2004, I was 11 and probably wouldn’t have liked this. Now I’m older but I don’t have the time.
Wow, people getting really upset about the score. I wonder how many are Xseed employees.
Go back to your Monster Hunter then troll.
A lot of jrpg dont know when to be quiet. They’re like girlfriends in that way.
Nothing but hating and trolling with this review.
Grow up anonatroll.
Ok. How about offering a reason why? NOLA indicated his problems with the game, now why don’t you do the same?
I seriously doubt there are any XSeed lurkers. They’re good guys, and very receptive to criticism.
Really how many do you know/have met?
I’m not ‘checking’ you, I’m curious/envious! 🙂