surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
send message
follow
followers
I agree with what some people here have been saying. I thought on its own Chrono Cross was pretty good, and I still enjoy it to this day. I don't believe it was the proper sequel to Chrono Trigger, however, and it felt more along the lines of a spin-off or one of those "set in the same universe" type of games.
I guess this is more evidence, if any was needed, that games are different things for different people. I enjoyed Chrono Cross, until the moment that you cite as its greatness. From that point on, I absolutely hated it. The Dead Sea scene, at least from my perspective, took the feeling of accomplishment and victory that I shared with my characters in Chrono Trigger, and told me that it was false. Crono and company's triumph over time and Lavos was a travesty, a crime (at least, according to CC).
You don't have to take the game's word for your actions though. You could easily argue that what was done Chrono Trigger had to be done because everything becomes pointless if the world ends abruptly from some arbitrary force. Just because the game condemns you doesn't mean you have to accept it. Keep in mind that the dialogue experienced in the Dead Sea is quite bias toward you, the player.
Well, the truth is that I didn't accept it. I turned off the Playstation.
I see where you're coming from, but the fact is that it's pretty impossible to set up a golden standard saying "this is what games should strive to be" because people take different things from different experiences.
My stance on this issue isn't that the time-meddling shouldn't be called into question. I think I would have enjoyed this sort of thing more if it had been Chrono et al. asking of themselves whether they did the right thing. I think the point at which moral dilemmas can be posed to the player is when the player faces a choice, especially a difficult one. If my objectives were plot driven, rather than player-chosen, then I think that the moral conflicts belong solely to the characters.
I see where you're coming from, but the fact is that it's pretty impossible to set up a golden standard saying "this is what games should strive to be" because people take different things from different experiences.
My stance on this issue isn't that the time-meddling shouldn't be called into question. I think I would have enjoyed this sort of thing more if it had been Chrono et al. asking of themselves whether they did the right thing. I think the point at which moral dilemmas can be posed to the player is when the player faces a choice, especially a difficult one. If my objectives were plot driven, rather than player-chosen, then I think that the moral conflicts belong solely to the characters.
I never said that my opinion of Chrono Cross is law, it's an opinion and that is that (least I hope people understand that). You have a perfectly valid point in that it should have been the original cast that is faced with the consequence. That perhaps would have made for a more relative plot in terms of a better sequel to Chrono Trigger. After all, in order to beat the game we had to choose one time line over all the others. One could argue that this problem is the original cast's, not the players since we had no say in approaching the issue of Lavos. I can totally see where you're coming from and I'm glad we could have a civil discourse with proper grammar and logical ideas. Not some internet dribble that reeks of stupidity.
FAKUNUBIWINLOLZOMGSTFUTITSORGTFO
...scratch that.
FAKUNUBIWINLOLZOMGSTFUTITSORGTFO
...scratch that.
