When did you realize it was the worst in the series?

When did you realize it was the worst in the series?

Attached: Persona3cover.jpg (250x357, 57.81K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=fK2vVOe5mN0
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

When the only dungeon in the game was shit.
When you weren't able to control your party members.
It's still a good game, but it's easily the weakest in the modern series. In terms of the overall series, it's a tossup between 3 and 1, but 1 was groundbreaking enough to start a spinoff more successful than its mainline series, so I'm willing to bump it up a notch.

Filtered

I don't think you understand Persona 3

QRD on SMT games? Why and how did Persona mantle it?

I've been playing the series backwards, did P5, P4G, P5R, and trying to P3P but I just can't into it
It seems really shitty both in game play mechanics and story. Music and characters aren't doing it either.

How about you provide a counterargument then.

Only people who have never played P1 or 2 think this.

Yea played 4 then 5 then 3 and it was really boring as fuck. Really liked the music and characters though.

Attached: 1605823167033.gif (640x444, 1.58M)

The dungeons in 4 were also bad, but at least there was some piss poor attempt at theming.
Honestly there's not enough difference for this one to stand out as bad.

Good one; however,
P3>5R=P2>P4>P1
simple as

Attached: 1607479181391.jpg (800x554, 227.49K)

>When you weren't able to control your party members.
Why is this such a casual filter?

P2 is vastly overrated. Story is good, but the game plays like shit.

Not controlling your party members was the point. Check the interviews sometime. Are you wearing a mask?

1, and 2 are a chore to play, same like SJ for me, but I did enjoy the story, characters and themes.

Attached: 1599396097522.jpg (500x331, 25.93K)

Because it's fucking shit with no gain in a genre that is already not very interactive. There is no "filter", it's just the some minimal sensibleness that P3 fags lack.

>it's shit on purpose!

Attached: CuRqQt1VYAAblWr.jpg (540x540, 36.39K)

>it's a good mechanic because...the devs intended it that way!
>mechanic is so bad that no other game in the series uses it and the remake even does away with it
Literally zero argument. What does not being able to control your party members add to the game?

You aren't the target audience. "Other people". Let me help you out: youtube.com/watch?v=fK2vVOe5mN0 bye

soul

>16 minute video with a 1 minute boss battle where allies do everything that a typical player would've done
What's your point?

You just don't want any strategy in an already very simple game. The reason you want to control your party members is because you're only able to play JRPG when you're healing every turn and mashing the attack button. Original P3 was balanced around one playable character, so controlling everyone is essentialy casualing the whole game (probably why they introduced it in Persona 3 Female Edition).

But WHAT strategy is it? You can decide what your allies should try to do, but what if they don't do what you want them to do?
>oh whoops i guess i should've strategized better
I'll give you that the game is designed around only having one controllable character from a balancing perspective, but that's all I'll give you. How would the game have been worse off if they rebalanced it around having all four party members controllable?

1 and 3 are the best though?

Sigh. Every fucking time. It's not your fault. When you reclaim your self-identity, give it another look.

like 4 hours into playing it.
>durr you don't understand
no you're just a nostalgiafag, suck a dick.

Attached: 1561261244277.png (453x500, 125.36K)

An actual legitimate reason is that it makes the characters feel more like individual entities instead of something controlled by you. Whether that's enough of a tradeoff is up for debate.

The entire point of removing party control was to synergize with other elements the game had involving party members being out of your control (getting sick, getting tired, bailing out of the dungeon on you, etc.). They were meant to feel like real people who don't really trust you or know you, not robots you control at your whim despite meeting you two days ago.

But 5 is the worst?

It's the worst at being the worst

Please spoonfeed me like I'm a retard because I genuinely don't understand why you linked that video.
It definitely creates a unique experience and I won't deny that it makes 3 a memorable experience, but I personally don't think the tradeoff is worth it.

This is why Chidori betrayed Junpei "I can't stand the sight of YOU ALL anymore". You can't control other people.

>1 was groundbreaking enough to start a spinoff more successful than its mainline series
persona 1 is literally just SMT with high schoolers and no alignment paths

3>=2>1>

>You can decide what your allies should try to do, but what if they don't do what you want them to do?
You're already a one-man murder-machine with several persona, if you get screwed because you relied on one of your ally, you probably didn't strategize anything to begin with.
>How would the game have been worse off if they rebalanced it around having all four party members controllable?
They tried in later games and it was worse. 4 & 5 are way easier.

>They were meant to feel like real people who don't really trust you or know you, not robots you control at your whim despite meeting you two days ago.
As much as it sounds like shitposting or a contrarian stance to take, I think that 4 and 5 missing this one specific point is ultimately what killed the series.

apparently that was groundbreaking enough to start a spinoff more successful than its mainline series. believe it or not, P1 was the best-selling Persona game before P5 came out.

>Imagine having this bad of an opinion.

Attached: 1594957842725.png (1000x700, 334.72K)