2020/4/18: Genesis: Herzog Zwei, Phantasy Star IV (Guest Review)

[VicViper]

But I wonder... remove the Phantasy Star name and stick this game on the SNES... would it still be considered a classic today? It's still a good game and I'm glad I gave it a playthrough; but I think the weaker RPG line-up on the Genesis helped its legacy.

Considering how stuff like Illusion Of Time & Secret Of Mana & Breath Of Fire on the SNES are considered cult classics despite their flaws, well yeah, I do believe that PSIV would still be a classic over there too.

I know it's a bit controversial, but I think outside of music and raw graphics, Secret Of Mana aged like cheese. And it's saying something that the 3D remake — which is worse on both of those fronts but did tweak some aspects of the gameplay — is still considered the worse alternative just based on it having less charm and feeling cheaper.

Even Tales Of Phantasia on SNES, I'm a Tales Of fan and the game's incredibly ambitious, but the battle system is REALLY stiff and difficult to get into, and that alone makes me prefer PSIV.

Granted I haven't played that many RPGs on 16-bits, but the only one I'd place above PSIV & FFVI no doubt is Chrono Trigger.

[ThePixelatedGenocide]

And the hits just keep on coming! I'd like to hear your thoughts on these two new Genesis reviews.

Critic, that's got to be the most fair minded negative review I've ever seen. Everyone now knows whether this is a challenge built for them - if only the professionals would take notes. And the amateurs. And the world in general, about more than just gaming.

Sometimes, it's fun to see you tear down a game that doesn't deserve the benefit of a doubt, but this kind of review adds a nice bit of balance -thank you for the honesty.

[ThePixelatedGenocide]

I had a feeling giving PS IV a B might turn some heads, considering its status. Its classic status was the main reason I played it, and I went into it hoping for an A+ experience. But I wavered a lot on the grade. I was always in the B range though, as I considered from a B+ to B- at different stages of my playthrough. But I wonder... remove the Phantasy Star name and stick this game on the SNES... would it still be considered a classic today? It's still a good game and I'm glad I gave it a playthrough; but I think the weaker RPG line-up on the Genesis helped its legacy.

To me, what holds PSIV back today is a weak storyline and a bunch of minor complaints that add up. The complaints are mentioned in the review, and those annoyances just piled up and nagged at me throughout the game, and could have been such easy fixes for the developers.

Like you mention, I also wanted to note the PS4 and FF6 comparison in my review, because I feel like it's been debated forever and it's hard to play PS4 without comparing it to FF6. The "console wars" subplot of those two games adds a little intrigue to reviewing PS4. But the two weren't as close as I hoped. PS4's story is less interesting, and its characters and villains are significantly weaker (in fact, one of PS4's big flaws is that it starts out with some good characters and villains and gradually rotates them out for boring characters by the midway point, making the plot worse the further you play). And when I played PSIV, most of my annoyances with it (nonsense spell names, awful inventory, difficulty buying weapons, etc.) didn't exist in FF6.. it made me feel like PSIV's quality-of-life mechanics were 5 years behind other top RPGs of its time.

Honestly, I don't understand why you gave it a B.

It sounds like a C+ review, with the only positives being a streamlined pace (a lack of side content that would have counted against a Final Fantasy), detailed graphics, and an epic soundtrack.

Those are the same things you could say about Shadow of the Beast, one of the worst games ever made.

I don't doubt you enjoyed your time with it - Shining Force 2, Virtua Fighter, Nights, and Sega Rally all prove Sega had a gift for streamlined thrills and polished design in every genre their top talent cared about...

But you seem to struggle to break that design down as easily as you broke down the faults of the game. I don't really have any sense of your experience with the risk/reward challenge (beyond frequent save points), or the depth of strategy, or the character growth/power fantasy or sense of exploration.

Also, despite the painfully generic story, I wonder whether this game would offer any sense of progression at all without the excellent presentation? The dungeons you explore are the furthest thing from memorable. I certainly can't remember them, and I've beaten the game.

[SPOILER WARNING] But the comic book panels offer a uniquely personal look at your traveling companions, one only bested by the Lunar games on CD. Losing Alys really felt like a gut punch back in the day, and enduring Raja's wit felt even more like cruel and unusual torture. But most of all, by the end, I really wanted Rika to survive and find happiness - seeing her leap out of the ship like a suicidal idiot at the end went a ways towards making up for Nei's cruel death. It almost felt like it brought the Megadrive series full circle.

And it just wouldn't have been the same without seeing the characters all giving so much of a damn about each other. Even without their words, you can see it in their faces.

It was good cliche', if that makes any sense?

Without that extra effort in presentation, this tale wouldn't rise to the level of mediocrity. And it feels like nobody would be comparing the game to FF6. (Or even FFIV, for that matter.)

[Retro STrife]

Honestly, I don't understand why you gave it a B.

It sounds like a C+ review, with the only positives being a streamlined pace (a lack of side content that would have counted against a Final Fantasy), detailed graphics, and an epic soundtrack.

Reading your post, I'm glad to hear someone who had a similar experience. And you make a fair point about the review sounding like a C+. My response would be that "fun" is sometimes hard to quantify and describe, at least for me, especially in a short review format. But I stuck with the game til the end for 30+ hours and did all the sidequests, and that says something about it's quality, even if it's much easier to rattle off complaints when it comes time for the review. I did enjoy my time with it, even if it always found some way to annoy me. But I think a C+ would also be a fair score if someone else gave it that score.

[bigfriendly]

I bought Herzog Zwei at Electronics Boutique way back in the day. I bought the game based on what the store employee told me about it. It took my friends and me a while but when we finally knew what we were doing we had a blast playing it. It can definitely take some time to finish a head to head matchup. However, I will be the first to admit that I see very little reason to plug this game in these days. Some vintage games are still fun to pull out and play every so often for old time's sake. Herzog Zwei isn't one of those titles. The main reason is that the limitations of the game which didn't look that big in the early 90's are glaringly obvious now. A few years after playing this game I played Command & Conquer for the first time and after playing that there was absolutely no reason to ever play Herzog Zwei ever again. After playing this game for a long time one of the biggest things that bothered me was that you can't select more than one unit at a time. In C&C you just box a group of units with your mouse and order them to do whatever you want. This was incredibly frustrating when you wanted to attack your enemy's base because your units wouldn't be lined up in any kind of formation. As you selected each unit and gave it instructions it would move and they all would essentially be in a straight line which made it much easier for your opponent to simply switch from his plane to ground robot and start blasting them one at a time. Another negative is the horrific slow down when a lot of stuff is moving on the screen at once. I realize that comparing this game to C&C which I first played on PC is not really fair. Unfortunately, when you are given so many more options in C&C it's just impossible to go back to HZ when it pales so much in comparison. I have fond memories of playing this with my friends in the early 90's but if we all still had a bunch time to spare playing retro games together I'm sure HZ wouldn't be one of them.

[_craker_]

Herzog Zwei. Played this one back in the day with my stoner Uni mates. It's a unique game on the system, its a unique game for the era.

Comparisons with C&C aren't really valid - there's a 5 year gap (1995!) before C&C game out on 2 CDs needing a 486 to run. Think C&C where you're not just ordering the units but one of the units (OK, an uber unit) that flies and transforms into a tank at will, manga style.

Yeah the learning curve may be steep. Yeah there's slowdown when you get a lot going on. But this is one of the most intense games I've ever played. When the enemy dude knocks you back to your base, you know he's trashing your forces and you've got to get back to sort it out.

Have to say D is way off the mark with this seminal title. It's tough, but once you learn the strategy of the computer he's beatable and it's fun to do so over and over again.

So arcade shooter meets RTS with the added bonus of two player split screen. And then Super Breakout gets a B?

[VideoGameCritic]

The games a primarily graded on fun and not technical merit. Also, the grades are only relative to other games for the same system.

[bigfriendly]

Another thing that I just remembered is that the computer cheats. Whenever the CPU doesn't have the money to build units they get built anyway.

[Matchstick]

Thanks for posting the PS IV review, Critic. As usual, my original draft was long and wordy, but the Critic's edit got it down to length. And big thanks to Matchstick too, who is a big fan of PSIV and gave a lot of good suggestions for the review. Glad to hear any feedback.

Better late than never, Retro - congrats on getting your review posted!! I loved reading it, and I think it hits all of the major notes regarding the game's ups and downs. It's a title I love, but I think your grade is perfect. Part of truly appreciating something is being able to identify its faults, and articulate why you feel the way you do about them. In that regard, your review fit the game perfectly.

The jury's still out on when (or if) I'll ever get around to a follow-up review of Phantasy Star II. Been an eventful year-and-a-half since I last posted (family emergencies, natural disasters, and that damn pandemic everyone keeps talking about...) but it's finally settled down enough that I plan on visiting the site again every once in a while. My wife and I just bought our first house and are still unpacking, and that Genesis Model 2 / Sega CD combo of mine is still buried down deep somewhere. Once I dig it out and get the man-attic set up, well... we'll see if the creative juices start flowing again.

I hope you've been well! Same goes to everyone else on these boards. Hopefully it won't be another 15 months before I make my next post ^_^

[bigfriendly]

My friends and I had a blast playing Herzog Zwei back in the early 90s. The games sometimes could be quite long and I will freely admit that this is a game that has aged horribly. The Genesis couldn't handle the action when things got crowded and it would really slow down to a crawl with lots of units on the screen at once. If I could have changed one thing about the game it would have been the ability to give orders to more than one unit at a time. A few years after playing this game I played Command and Conquer on the PC and that made Herzog Zwei look like Pong in comparison.