Remembering: Gunstar Heroes

Gunstar Heroes is amongst the most highly-regarded games of the 16 bit era. Easily a top ten contender on the Genesis/Mega Drive platform, and undoubtedly a must-play for the retrogaming scene. This is mainly due to its creators, the somewhat legendary programming team Treasure, whom broke off from Konami to make some serious games. Games that arguably helped sell a console, or would be discovered as genre classics later on. And the odds are, you've ready played it. Sega published the title and has made it a regular feature of its retro Compilations. The merit of Gunstar Heroes as a run and gun shooter is unassailable at this point, but I want to talk about why I found it awesome. 

 

The game boots up with immediate cutscenes. What's the plot? That's complicated as somebody rewrote it for English speakers, and it's presented in media res, which is a bit high brow for a game mainly about blowing shit up. You get the impression that some bad stuff is going down, only for THAT title screen to hit like a comet, and if you wait a bit you get more exposition, but you're probably none the wiser. Basically, everyone is named after a colour, and bad guys want gems to repair some kind of doomsday robot, so stop them. Cool. So, you press start, choose your control scheme, your starting gun, and 1 of 4 levels, while two characters natter flavour text and tips. You go for the leftmost level, and immediately you have to stop robots from destroying a jungle village. Then you fight a killer plant. Then you climb a pyramid. Then you fight a boss made of boxes. Then you slide down the pyramid. Then you fight a construction robot boss, with a dramatic end of level announcement. Then there's a comedy cutscene where its crew fly off, Team Rocket Style, and your character strikes a pose. Then you're back at the level select screen. Phew.

All the above happens in under 7 minutes. By 16 bit standards, you have what amounts to an entire games worth of action set-pieces, and several games worth of "narrative" in what is the first and least impressive level, plus skippable text. It only gets better from there. This is awesome.

Gunstar Heroes is a game that is at once an easily assessable spectacular, and a mechanically nuanced system for experts. Unlike a majority of its genre, it actually provides numerical health meters for characters and bosses, thus avoiding one-hit kills. This should make the game easier, but it doesn't feel easier. Rather it means that mistakes are yours, and the game is kicking your arse fair and square. Play is more a matter of learning and skill, finding what works for you, rather than rote memorisation and twitch reflexes. You get a huge amount of freedom, from your characters firing stance, the starting weapon, the way weapons combine, and a surprisingly complex melee system. Body-slams, sliding kicks, throws, and an easily missed block, are there if you need them. The game won't punish you for experimenting, but also takes terms like "hard mode" very seriously. It's not cheap, in other words, and the creators clearly wanted you to play this repeatedly because you want to, not because it's so difficult to complete you couldn't do it in a weekend rental. R-Type, I'm looking in your general direction. Everybody can enjoy this, and it's two player co-op, where you can throw your mate as an improvised weapon. 

As a final note: while it does not shine by modern standards, Gunstar Heroes was a significant technical achievement for its day. This is best represented by sprite-scaling masterpiece that was Seven Force, possibly the single greatest boss fight of the 90's. This 7 form monster was almost unreal by Mega Drive standards, and it's obvious how proud they were with it. It's in level 2, where everybody could see it.

Go play Gunstar Heroes, you muppet.

Remembering: R-Type

Some styles of game I'm fascinated by, even though I'm terrible at them. Your average 2D spaceship shooter, circa the 90's, is the sort of thing I mean. I love watching letsplays of these. While games such as this do have their modern descendants in the bullet hell genre, its a form of game that has basically been extinct since the PS1/3D era, having previously been as common as muck. The reason why I'm terrible at them is due to poor reflexes and a difficulty processing all the info on screen, versus the precision required. Spaceship shooters, regardless of viewpoint, leave little margin for error due to their arcade origins. The reason why I'm fascinated by such things is because of that same difficulty, and because these games were kinda cinematic. The best ones were always distinctive to look at. And amongst the most distinctive was a game I played on the old Sega Master System: a port of 1987's R-Type.

When you got right down to it R-Type had no plot to speak of and some very disjointed visual design. This is not unusual for the genre, but worth mentioning. I mean, narratively it's just "Blast off and strike the evil Bydo Empire!“, and it's a bit of a trope blender. Why do some Bydo look like vehicles, and others angry meat? Why are some levels high tech, and others look like the inside of someone's digestive system? Am I fascinated with this specific game only because of this discordant stream of techno-organic imagery? Does it matter? Is this all superficial? Maybe not, but it did have subtly complex gameplay. The active ingredient is the "Force", a little multi-purpose attack drone that's your first power up. This can attach to the front or back of your ship, acting as a shield, and boosting your firepower. Attached, it can block most bullets, but detached it can help destroy lesser enemies by firing at a different angle or with a spread effect. Meanwhile, you have probably the most destructive weapon in the game immediately, a charge cannon which is devastating to bosses if you time it right. These tools make R-Type a decidedly methodical and unforgiving experience, and one few have dared to copy. As the game gives you more or less everything you need in the first five minutes to master the game, you are expected to master the game. Play its way, and play flawlessly. I never could. Thanks to its level design and approach to difficulty, it's possibly as much a single solution puzzle as a shooter. 

 

R-Type got a fair number of sequels, but these skipped Sega platforms, so I didn't touch base with any until the supposedly last game: R-Type Final. During that gap, the franchise became known as a uniquely hard-core and somewhat creepy example of its genre, a big name that was always remembered despite lengthy gaps between instalments. Final, released in 2003, was very much a nostalgia product, although you could say that about the franchise overall. By this point, it was played in a 2.5D view, with graphics rendered in full 3D, but gameplay being resolutely 2D. To my eyes, this only makes things more challenging, in an unearthly vertigo sorta way. The original R-Type could be oddly disturbing for its time, but Final seems to delight in using camera movements to heighten a sense of unease. I could not complete this one either, a bit of a shame that, given the fricking dozens of ships you could unlock. But then again, perhaps the R-Type franchise was too set in its ways? Being aggressively difficult just because you can, is not necessarily a cool thing in game design these days. Well, unless we're talking Dark Souls, but it's not like you can reasonably complete that in under 30 minutes of play time. 

Did R-type end with Final? Dear me, no. At the time of writing, there's a kickstarter project making Final 2. I'm sure it will please its backers, although it remains unclear if this will be a success on the level of Sonic Mania or Streets of Rage 4. It looks rather a lot like Final, or that remastered release Dimensions, only with better graphics and less creative risk. Irem did however mix things up things up in the 16 year interim with R-Type Tactics, aka R-Type Command. This is a game I want to play, as its a turn-based strategy game, which is one hell of an unexpected detour. It even got a sequel. Sadly, untranslated. Sadly, both on PlayStation Portable. <sigh>

So, should you play R-Type? Or an instalment thereof? Well, probably. I've been somewhat dismissive above, but I can't deny it's strong appeal. Which it obviously has, because I wouldn't be writing about something I suck at if it didn't.

Retro Review: Kidou Senshi Gundam F91 - Formula Senki 0122 (Super Famicom)

In terms of genre influence and sheer relentless merchandising, the Gundam franchise is very much the Japanese Star Wars. Not the first of its kind, but one of those works that came along, dropkicked the status quo, and became the establishment. Anime wasn't the same after. It even has its own laser swords and Space Nazis. As it has nearly 40 years of material, of wildly variable quality, its not easy to generalise, but the gist is as follows. People live in space stations, some on Earth, bad feelings all round, so war with giant robots, piloted by angsty teens. Lots of moral ambiguity and war is hell motifs. Today's game, Kidou Senshi Gundam F91 - Formula Senki 0122 , or F91 for sanity, fits into the original Gundam canon, where a bunch of Space Nazis from Mars are causing trouble. They use robots which look exactly like those from the 1979 original, though updated, seemingly just for reasons of brand recognition(1). But is F91 any good? Well, interesting is perhaps the better word. 

The games big selling point is that while it looks like a SRPG it's actually a , honest to god, turn-based/real-time hybrid. A faintly underwhelming map screen, gives way to a faux cockpit, with 3rd person battle animations. Your main inputs are manoeuvre and positioning in real time, but with attacking and the map screen handled in a turn based fashion. Its a a rush to line up a shot against rapidly moving targets, with each weapon having own its optimal range, and your Gundam having limited fuel. Succeed, and you get an animation of the attack connecting, and hopefully an explosion. Fail, and see it miss. You can dash back to a capital ship for a top up, and switch between fancy weapon packs mid battle. The Gundam(2) you use for most of the game has modular parts, allowing you to tailor it to your requirements, adding a layer of strategy to an otherwise tactical game. But the battle continues without you, Jegans and Zakus beating 7 bells out of each other, meaning you can get flanked, and so on. Its not rendered in 3D, but feels a solid representation of Mobile Suit combat as presented in the various animations, with the music being a highlight. Meanwhile there's a story going on, depicted mainly by cutscences between battles. Any good? Well, it's a Gundam sidestory where the antagonists are cosplaying warmachines from 40 odd years prior. A translation patch is required, which seems to work OK. The narrative definitely looks and feels appropriate to the franchise, if not one of it's best. And that's the game in a nutshell, really. It looks and feels right, having pretty good production values, if not necessarily exceptional in its execution. The general feeling of above average is also backed up by it having a battery save, even though the game is light of justification for one. This game could have easily worked with a password system, as it has only 12 levels and is not an RPG, so I can only assume Japanese convention was happily at work here.

The battles do however get a bit samey. As the battle animations are repetitive, what the game ends up doing is training you to stare at the radar in the bottom right, as that's where most of the useful info is. That sense of repetition also increases as the game goes on, where you end up on Earth after fighting in space, and the game plays the same. Kinda disappointing, that. Its also something of a coin toss if an attack connects or not, as the game doesn't see fit to let you aim yourself, or tell you the odds. Also, choosing between the weapon pack doesn't actually represent that big of choice, as there's only 2 at first with limited weapons. This makes things a little frustrating, although new weapons and equipment do unlock and ease these complaints. Ultimately though, its not that deep of a game, despite nailing the setting. While by no means bad, I feel this game needed to be either more of a simulation, or more a bangy-zoomy game.

 

Conclusion
<Indecisive noise>, okay. F91 is a game that sets out to capture the spirit of its setting, while defying gaming convention, and largely achieves both aims, but I didn't love it. I wouldn't really call it a great game, but it is an mechanically interesting one. And, despite nitpicks, I can certainly imagine Gundam fans then and now warming to it. Some distance from a classic, but it doesn't have much to apologise for. If the concepts discussed above appeal to you, maybe check it out.

Foot notes

1. I am deeply cynical about this, and it makes less and less sense the more I think about it.
2. The term “Gundam” is also used mainly for brand recognition, as in universe it was the most famous Federation mecha.

Retro Review: Chō Jikū Yōsai Macross (Famicom)

I think we need some context, here. In 1982, Big West went and made The Super Dimension Fortress Macross, a very influential Japanese anime. They did however run short of money, prompting some poorly worded contracts, and a never ending legal nightmare for all involved. It is for this reason Macross is known as the foundational instalment of Robotech, a series where 3 unrelated properties were nailed together by the famously litigious Harmony Gold. Its a long story, but eff those guys. Transformers fans will also recognise the main mecha from it as Jetfire. Meanwhile, the UK gaming scene was off being its own thing, dominated by low-cost computers like the Sinclair Spectrum, and then by the Sega consoles and stuff like the Amiga. This is also a long story, but suffice to say the NES/Famicom wasn't as a big thing here as in America and Japan. Advance forward thirty odd years, and I'm experimenting with retrogaming platforms. I chance upon a Famicom Macross game, and decide it would make a good test subject for my Retrofreak.

I kinda hate it.

Now, this is not automatically the same as saying its a bad game. I lot of people make that mistake, especially fanboys, you disliking something is not automatically a failing in that media(1). Objective flaws of course do exist, coding bugs for example, and when writing a review it's best to keep some kind of dispassionate viewpoint, lest you confuse an emotional response for an actual fault. What this game does wrong is mainly be very old, and not especially creative with the licence, while I generally suck at this sort of game and don't have the necessary nostalgia goggles. 

So, lets talk mechanics. CJYM is a side scrolling spaceship shooter, a shoot-em-up, the Battle Royale of its day. You advance from left to right, shooting baddies, and eventually fighting bosses. It's fairly typical of its time, although with two major exceptions. Your Valkyrie can change form, behaving differently in each, and has a health bar. I didn't find much reason to transform, but the latter change goes some way to making the game tolerable for me, if still having embarrassing difficulty with the first level. Presentation is also quite reminiscent of the series, with recognisable enemy designs, and a Minmay doll starting the action with a gong, while a chip tune version of the series' track Shao Pi Long also plays. In so far as the technology of the time allowed, it's a reasonably mix of gameplay with licence, like putting Bruce Lee in a Street fighter 2 clone(2). Mind you, "of the time“ is probably the most obvious stock complaint I could make of the game. Its production values show its age, and the gameplay isn't good enough to compensate. Less subjectively, it would appear to be a game with no actual ending, instead looping indefinitely the same level, just with an increasing enemy count. I can't confirm this, and the let's play I found tend last 20 minutes at most, but I honestly can't bring myself to check. It's Transbot all over again. 

Conclusion

There could have been a good game here, but what we have here is a best a prototype that wasn't finished. Video games based on licensed properties do have a terrible reputation, and my self-doubt aside, this game is an example of why. I honestly can't recommend it. Maybe look into Scrambled Valkyrie on the Super Famicom, I hear its rather good.

Foot Notes

1. I'm looking at you, people complaining about female characters in Star Wars and Captain Marvel.
2. Which they did. And a Bruce Lee clone in actual Street Fighter 2.
   
   

Retro Review: Front Mission (Super Famicom)

OK then, I finished Front Mission 3. What game did I play next? Something even more obscure and gaming-hipster-weeb, the first game in the series, Front Mission. Another strategic game with big robots. A game made during the golden age of Japanese Role Playing Games, but one not to get an English version until it got remade for a later platform. Here we see two superpowers, the OCU and USN (1) slug it out over a scrap of nothing called Huffman Island, but is it any good? Well, I'll get to that, but first, I wanna talk about how I played it. While Front Mission received a remastered version on the Nintendo DS, here I used an original cartridge on the Retrofreak emulation console. This provokes a certain degree of "Vinyl versus Spotify" style argument amongst purists, as this is mechanically different from the original hardware, even with the original cart. 16 bit emulation is however a mature technology at this point, and devices such as this allow HDMI output, which is more convenient. I also used the Retrofreaks ability to apply fan-made translation patches, without which the game is somewhat unplayable.

Moving on.....

On first impression, the original game is much more consistent visually than FM3, if inevitably more primitive. FM doesn't have the burden of awkward 3D, and by the standards of the time, certainly holds its own. Its a later generation Famicom release, so the developers knew what they were doing, but also because the game is going against so many JRPG conventions. At the risk of making a sweeping generalisation, games of this ilk, especially those by Squaresoft, tended towards bright colours, and frequently cutesy character designs. Of course, cutscenes and close-up character portraits may have been completely different, but that was the default. Even the seemingly immortal Super Robot Wars series did and does favour a super deformed look for its mecha. This probably owes as much to technical limitations as artistic choice TBH, and this is by no means a failing, but genre convention was there. Here's a screen grab of the highly regarded Final Fantasy VI(2).

 

Notice how the baddie is a nice big-if-static sprite, where as the heroes are in totally different style, and the menu takes up much of the screen space. Now here's what today's review subject looks like.

 

See what I mean? FF6 is a classic for a reason, but, Front Mission is by comparison a darker, grittier, and more visually detailed game. At least in areas which it prioritises. Mecha designs are basically gorgeous, with pleasing animations, and lengthy customisation potential. It's not a big thing these days, but back then? Having equipment visibly change on a sprite was a rare, even if Front Mission seems to like its robots carrying a pair of guns as big as they are(3). Mind you, FM also boils down interactions outside of combat into a series of menus, and you'll see the same town a lot. A lot, a lot. There's no overworld to explore, no random encounters, no side quests, and the closest thing to a diversion is the colosseum, which offers simplified battles where you can bet on yourself. So, if you're not sold on the battles, there's only so much else here. The general interface does also feel outdated, with the day-to-day matters of Wanzer management being more fiddly than they should. In battle, its possible to loose Wanzers behind buildings, or forget what units are damaged, as the game isn't too hot at conveying info on the map screen. This is what I mean when I say this game was more primitive than its PS1 sequel; its clearly an earlier version for less capable hardware, but pixels are more nostalgic than polygons...

Combat is elegant, favouring large groups. if having some quirks. It uses a grid map, but displayed from a fixed isomeric angle. Its functional, dropping into more viseral combat animation, but Its somewhat more in your face and exaggerated than I expected. Most guns have a range of 1 square, the main exception being Missiles, which have limited ammo. Wanzers can act to defend themselves in the enemy turn, if not by counter attacking then by blocking with arms to protect the main body. Going melee is quite practical, due to the prevailing presence of single shot attacks and easy item stowage. Choosing the right tool for the job though is important, Wanzers having separate health bars for body parts, and guns firing either a burst of shots or one big bullet. Then there's wrinkles like Shields sharing the same shoulder mounts as Missiles and hybrid weapons that have variable range. The whole Lego mecha appeal is definitely here, if slanted towards Wanzers some de-facto character classes. The game presents foes with names like Missiler and Attacker, and while these aren't fixed, they do represent the obvious designs. All this often boils down to a rock/paper/scissors affair, but you'll be controlling more than 10 units at a time, so there's plenty to get your teeth into. Here's a summary of what you'll be working with, named after the class of weapons they use.

Fight Wanzers
Fairly self-explanatory, these guys rock up and punch things. Often literally, as while tonfas are a thing, some arms hit really hard bare-handed. These Wanzers have to be both fast and tough, as they not only have to walk a fair bit, enemies can fire their guns defensively before you can swing. Special skills however turn off that weakness, as well as allowing you to do combos and stun people. Fight Wanzers are the hard-counter to missile equipped Wanzers, but they aren't precise.

Short Wanzers
The tactically flexible and the most powerful type of Wanzer, with a wide array of weapons, but most frequently dual machine guns. This is due to the aggressive selection of special skills, which allow for both more dakka and the ability to target specific body parts. This can mince a majority of targets, although weight and effective range can be an issue.

Long Wanzers
*Sniggering* These are characterised by having two big missile launchers, and maybe a bazooka as a back-up. Acting to soften up a target before you finish them off, these only get one special skill, and it's a goody. They can target specific body parts at a distance, and can therefore disarm people before they become a threat. Ammo is however a problem, as is absorbing damage, so they tend to stick close to....

Peewee the supply truck driver

A source of passive buffs where everyone else is a fighter class, Peewee provides emergency repairs, and spare weapons should you need a different gun. He and his ilk add a lot the game, and I feel Front Mission 3 suffers for their absence. Then again, this is another area with an awkward interface.

Two things however bother me about the whole business though. Firstly, the game doesn't actually encourage you to experiment with Wanzer designs that much. Most parts are linear upgrades, which undermines the whole appeal of customising your robots, and upgrades are so frequent as to make it feel like busy work. Its the old RPG staple of new town, buy new sword. Second, while there is a hint of a logistics/management side to the game, I didn't feel I had to make difficult decisions as such. You do get money based on mission performance, and charged for repairs, but I was swimming in cash for the most part, even as my squad sizes hit double figures. If I'd done less well, or if replacement parts had been a bit more spread out, maybe I'd have enjoyed things more, but your mileage may vary. That said, variety and meaningful choice does increase as you go on, with weapons being more immediately complex than Wanzer bits as they often represent side grades to each other. Also on the plus side, the game does not require or encourage level grinding, in my experience.

And finally, there is the matter of narrative, which is OK, if slow to bloom and linear. Putting aside sheer genre saturation, the SNES/Famicom format having buttloads of RPGs, it wouldn't be a surprise if FMs story was part of the reason why it wasn't localised into English at first. Nintendo USA at around this time was clearly opposed to "adult" stuff, and while this game isn't gory its definitely dark and political. I mean, in the first level alone the lead character Lloyd Clive(4) undertakes a blackops mission that goes so badly a war starts, sees his fiancé brutally killed in combat by the final boss, only to then be made a scapegoat for the entire mess. He then joins a mercenary unit, thus becoming a man both grieving and in decidedly grey moral standing. Its not the hero's journey, and it doesn't really become a revenge story until much later. What it is at first is episodic, and quite anime cliché, but gets increasingly bleak and almost unrecognisable in later missions. That said, while the themes and ideas are interesting, the actual execution isn't great. How much of this is the fan translation, or just it being an old game, is up for debate, but I found it to be workmanlike rather than compelling.

Conclusion
A good first try, but not a masterpiece. Front Mission is a game with a very specific appeal, offering some nice strategic gameplay, robo-go-boomy, an interesting story, but very much a product of its time. Is it better than Front Mission 3, the game that brought me to the franchise? Honestly, no. The overall experience isn't as refined, the mechanics of the game not quite coming together, and the story being functional rather than having a strong hook. Is this the same as saying its a bad game? Definitely not. I had a good time with it, so check it out. Maybe go for the DS remake though, if the option is available.

Foot notes

1. That's Japan + others versus The USA + others.
2. Or Final Fantasy 6, if you want to use proper numbers, and aren't currently in 90's America.
3. Not a complaint, an observation.
4. At least, this is what the translation patch calls him. The instruction manual romanised his name as “Roid Clive”, while other sources give it as “Royd Clive”. I'm not in a position to judge which is more correct, so I'll use the one that is less immediately stupid.

Ten Tips for Playing Front Mission 3

Does it count as a clickbait title when the subject is so obscure? Ehh. Following on from my review of the game proper, here's some advice for playing Front Mission 3. And so you know that I'm not completely useless, here's my end game rankings. Yes, there is some vanity in displaying it.

 

Go on that Intarwebz
While the Internet is the least exciting part of the game, it occasionally can assist missions, and does provide various battle simulators for level grinding. Also, its possible to acquire the most powerful Wanzer by keeping an eye on shady websites. You don't have to check every mission, but don't ignore it.

Never sell your starting Wanzers, just pass em around
Front Mission 3 is rather obtuse about Battle Skills, but most characters have machines that match them rather well. The Zenislev(1) and Kyojun Mrk107 are also notable for having skills that remain unexciting-but-useful throughout the game.

It's best to have lots of little skills
While things get more nuanced later on, it's usually best to stack multiple 1 slot Battle Skills, ideally identical. This is because these trigger and combo more often. In an extreme example, when using a Rifle, it's more or less mandatory to take Zoom 4 times, as it overcomes the problems of being single shot.

Missiles are easy spammed, but Shields are better
Due to their range and damage, Missiles are powerful even in the hands of a novice character. However, this does not last, as your foes improve. Shields however are always useful, and increasingly mandatory. You will almost always be outnumbered, after all.

Be a fiddler crab
You are not obliged to have symmetrical or even attractive Wanzers, so mix and match parts. My goto design was a skinny but precise arm with 2 guns on it, a beefy arm for the shield, and a generator backpack to compensate.

Steal every Wanzer you see
Tactics are ultimately king, but don't let yourself fall behind in the arms race. Boss types can't be pinched, but there's an entire family of high quality Wanzers you can't buy, but you need(2). This can be be greatly eased by....

Buy a Tiadong ASAP
Pilfering Wanzers is hard to do at first, as you have to force units to surrender. You need the luck for them loose morale, and a gentler weapon to force the issue without killing them. The Tiadong arm however has the useful skill Eject Punch, which saves a bit of time, if somewhat unsporting.

Have understudys, but not clones
Front Mission 3 ultimately gifts you with 8 characters, and it wants you to use them. Try to maintain a pair of missile people, and two punchy dudes. Note that Wanzers can fulfil more than one role, and try not to overspecialise.

If in doubt, set your armour to Piercing
Cutscenes will often telegraph what the enemy has, but weapons that cause Piercing damage are the most common. The only force that doesn't favour machine guns or rifles are the regular army of Da Han Zong, where upon you choose Impact.

And finally, go with Ryogo
When he asks. You know, early on.


Foot notes
1) Actually a mistranslation, it should be Zenith Rev.
2) And when you meet their owners, trust me, you'll want to take them out of spite.

Retro Review: Front Mission 3 (PS1)

A depressingly small number of people seem to care about the Front Mission series of video games. I mean, obviously, its established in Japan. Its just when you google it, you get tumble-weeds and Russian-language video clips. There is an entry on Steam, but its so badly received, I've not bothered to play it. I did however pick up Front Mission 3 (FM3) while at a retro-games fair, having happy memories of it. FM3 is what I like to call a "Lego mecha game", where a majority of your time is spent swapping parts, refining a team of giant robots and sending them into battle. It falls into the Strategic RPG genre, in that its turned-based and set on a grid, while have role playing mechanics. Such things aren't hugely common these days, and certainly weren't back then, either. This example is however noteworthy for not being a licensed game, naming its robots “Wanzers”, and for being made by Squaresoft at the height of their Play Station power. Yes, the Final Fantasy people. This franchise should be absolutely HUGE, but it isn't, due to a lack of localised entries. First impressions after 20 odd years, running on my PS3?

Its not exactly a looker.

Making the obvious allowances for age, FM3 is somewhat uneven when it comes to production values. There's no denying the detail and sense of weight that Wanzers have, with some good CG cutscenes at key points, but its not exactly a performance game engine. The image above makes it look better than it does in motion. Its all about brief exchanges of violence, and uses depressively low res sprites for the map screen. The game was criticised for this at the time, IIRC. I've found myself wishing for a HD remake along the lines of Valkyria Chronicles , because while it isn't actually ugly, it does feel like a awkward transitional step like so many of the early polygonal/CD games of its time. And then you remember Armored Core was out 2 years before this, and Final Fantasy 8 was out in the same year..... Of course FM3 probably wasn't meant to be played on a flatscreen. And there's the cleaned up network version that you can play on a Vita, as well as "aftermarket" options. Strategy games aren't really about the graphics, of course, and the game is spectacular on its own terms, but uneven is uneven. Another area where the game has aged poorly is its Internet section, which provides some distractions from the meat of the experience, as well as world building. Sadly, it runs at the speed of dail-up, and doesn't really offer much incentive to keep coming back.

Anyway, despite subjective complaints about presentation, the actual combat system is a pleasing solid one, the kind where simple but elegant concepts get layered atop each other. You can simply just power through the violence like you would with a Final Fantasy, by grinding and simply buying shinier kit, but that's not really clever long term. You need to pay some attention, and experimentation is encouraged. Here's some of the things you need to consider.

1) Wanzers move and attack based on Action Points, which are also used in the enemy turn for defence and counterattack. You therefore have to strike a balance between offence, defence, and positioning.

2) Weapons have differing ranges and AP costs, as well as one of three damage types which a Wanzer could get bonuses against. So, you need the right weapon in the right place.

3) Furthermore, Wanzers have 5 distinct health bars, only one of which being fatal, while weapons alternate between a single big hit or a spray. Again, you need the right weapon in the right place, to wear down, cripple, and finally finish off your target.

4) While having healing items like a common JRPG, these have to be assigned to s specific Wanzer in a dedicated backpack. Certain weapons also have limited ammo, which also have reload items. This will result in design compromises.

5) Punching people is entirely possible due to the high accuracy and low AP cost. Such attacks do however allow the enemy to shoot a Wanzer before it strikes.

6) Finally, Battle Skills break these concepts in various ways, but triggering randomly so you can't rely on them. You can however chain them together for max damage.

I had some immense fun with all that. There's a some some real chunky goodness to all this if you care to look into it. The battles are often scripted, rather than having noteworthy AI, but the game does reward intelligent and adaptive play. I called this a "Lego mecha game" earlier, and that is very much the case. You can and should rebuild your Wanzers as you go, trying to optimise your designs and unlock new skills. However, if you want a character to keep their original Wanzer, you can do that too. Components can be upgradef multiple times, characters often having some handy skill in their starting mecha. The worst I can say is that a FAQ might be useful, because the game obscures that sort of information. Here's a video of what you are in for.

I've talked mainly about combat and how its presented so far, but there is in fact a story. Two of them. FM3 benefits from 2 lengthy narrative campaigns, each being the thick end of 40 hours. Which one you get is based on an innocuous choice, which sees characters switching roles, quite dramatically in some cases, but the broad-strokes remain the same. What starts as an espionage thriller, sees the cast flee Japan, becoming catspaws for a rival superpower, getting involved with a civil war in future-China, before returning to Japan to take on the Real antagonists. There's a lot of realpolitik going on, and there's enough meat to keep you interested, although I regret that its not really possible to go into the full merits here. The unfortunate thing is that this is relayed entirely through cutscences, not gameplay. Its a wall of text, something which I suspect console gamers of the time didn't welcome. Indeed, it's easy to go on autopilot with these sections, and maybe miss a few of the meaningful choices you can make. I did, completely missing one character for 20 odd years. Characters can also blur together after a while, going out of focus as the narrative forgets about them for a bit. There's no actual mechanical difference between them, as skills are based entirely on Wanzer parts, which can be a strength, but if you're gonna have this much freedom, you may as well allow full character creation. Either that, or give characters something unique to hang a hat on. That having been said, the narrative is never less than engaging, and while I like the gameplay more, seeing where the plot would go had its pull.

Conclusion

Front Mission 3 is very good at what it chooses to focus on, but it hasn't aged gracefully. A lot of the complaint s I make boil down to genre convention; you don't buy a game such as this for graphics, you buy it for the turned based combat. That's got a very specific appeal, and while the game makes efforts to present things well, those efforts were not treated well by time. Its not a game that' you'd use to convert someone to a genre, is you get my meaning? Fortunately, the actual gameplay has held up extremely well, and the story holds your attention. If you can get past its dated graphics and you're onboard with giant robots, give it a try. And then wonder where that month went.