http://www.gamespot.com/news/2004/08/30/news_6106064.html
Sounds very promising and I would love for it to be a remake!
It sounds to me that it’ll be a “follow up” to Sega’s latest Shining game on the Gameboy Advance, Shining Force Resurrection of the Dark Dragon. I’d be suprised if they remade it yet again. Perhaps Sega rereleased the original Shining Force in preparation for this game?
I should really get off my butt and actually finish the original Shining Force…
Sega is changing the battle system for the Playstation 2 incarnation of Shining Force, so I’m not expecting great things from this game now.
Changing the traditional battle system that made the Shining Force games so great in the first place is not a good idea.
I’m waiting to see proper screenshots of the game before making any final judgments.
On a more positive note, the artwork for the game actually looks far more distinct than the artwork found in Shining Tears, although it still bears no true resemblence to the artwork in Camelot’s Shining games.
[quote=“Geoffrey Duke”]Sega is changing the battle system for the Playstation 2 incarnation of Shining Force, so I’m not expecting great things from this game now.
Changing the traditional battle system that made the Shining Force games so great in the first place is not a good idea.[/quote]
They’re… changing the battle system?
In what ways?
“and will feature a new gameplay mode where more than 20 characters can clash simultaneously.”
I missed that, somehow.
It sounds interesting actually. I’m not sure how it would work, but I don’t have a problem with the developers trying something original so long as it’s well executed… it’s still too early to tell at this point, though. Maybe, you’ll choose all of your characters moves for the turn and then watch it unfold.
I would enjoy a new battle system, if they reused the same one it would feel too similar. With a new battle system it, to me atleast, would feel like a totally new game.
It’s like playing many turn-based RPG’s such as Xenogears, and then Chrono Cross, while two totally different games, the battle system was redundant since i’ve already played it to death in the previous game.
All that could mean is that you can have 20+ characters in a battle rather than a smaller number making it a hard decision on which ppl to take with u in the next battle.
Though it could also mean it might go for a vandal hearts approach as well where both teams chose their moves then the battle unfolds at the same time for all the units so you basically have to second guess the enemy’s movements in order to hit his units. If I remember right that is, it’s been ages since I tried that game and it wasn’t for that long, it seemed allright but I didn’t own it, only played it for a while at a friend’s place so I could be waaaaay off in what I’m saying about it so don’t judge it by that.
And for the last comment by fmalinkevich: If it loses one of the two main aspects of the series then why make it a game of that series and not make a new story for it and a new series? SF series are what they are, turn based strategy rpg games. Their system rocks and should only be improved and added on rather than totally changed imo. At the very least they could make it another “Shining” game without the “Force” bit in the style of Soul, Wisdom, Tears etc which are part of the same universe but are different kinds of games. If it’s SF they have to atleast keep the core the same and change the “Details” like spell casting system, attacking system etc if they feel the current system has gotten old and has no room for improvement /depth additions - which imo it has loads of room for antyhing they might wanna do with it - rather than make a totally different system.
The only change I’d easily accept is if it was something totally unique (or as fun as if it’s totally unique) and a lot more than “just as good”, kind of like the change from PDZ to PDS 
I also don’t think there is anything out there that makes you feel like you’ve already played a new SF game apart perhaps from SF3 but that was a long time ago and the system wouldn’t be identical ofcourse, it would have improvements and additions anyway plus a great story again.
There’s other games of the genre like tactics ogre, final fantasy tactics, fire emblem, front mission, vandal hearts, but I feel they are all very different and don’t make you feel like you’ve played all of them if you’ve played one. Well except if u’ve played tactics ogre you might feel like you’ve played FFT cos they are VERY similar since they had the same team doing them but other than those two everything else is dinstinct. They are just all turn based strategy /rpg games.
The only thing I can see close to this is that if you’ve played too many of these games, they are usually long and hard so you might not have the patience to play through yet another one. (Which is how I felt up until I tried Fire Emblem and saw how distinct and fun it is.) But then you just don’t buy it and buy something else, you don’t expect the series to change genre just cos you got bored of this kind of games.
Just like there’s a lot of real time strategy games but Ground Control II is nothing like Command and Conquer or Warcraft 3 or the upcoming Warhammer40K: Dawn of War - which by the way is amazing from what I’ve seen of it at my friend’s place (He downloaded the open multiplayer beta of it) so, yes Arcie, maybe you lost a Warhammer MMORPG but this RTS is sure to keep you happy when it’s released!
There’s always generic games of a genre that make you feel like you’ve finished them 100 times before when you haven’t but barely started them but the gems of the genre don’t do that and SF IS a gem of the TBS/RPG genre.
I personally don’t lik any of the new artwork, IMO it pales in comparison to the camleot era artwork, especially Shining force 3.
You make some very good points Al3xand3r, but they can still change the battle system and keep it a Shining Force game. What I meant is that if they changed nothing and reused the battle system I don’t belive i’d like it as much. They can keep the foundation, but they need to add something innovative or unique. I’m excited about think 20 plus characters in battle idea. I’ve always wanted a game where it felt like an epic battle, not a small skirmish between gangs.
The artwork doesn’t really bother me at this point because it’s static and at this point in time is possibly even a mock-up of what they’re hoping the game will look like.
The 20+ characters actually sounds pretty good to me because one thing I liked about the Shining Force series is that it was possible to take quite a few people into battle with you. It was quite a shock for me when I first played Final Fantasy Tactics because my party was a tiny four or five people!
Truthfully, hearing that there’s yet another bright young heroine with a tragic past who’s in love with the main hero makes me wretch more than anything the artwork and battle system can do. 
No, Sega can’t.
If Sega has no intention of using the traditional Shining Force battle system for the Playstation 2 incarnation of Shining Force, then Sega has no right to use the word “Force” in the title.
While I’m awaiting more details before giving my final verdict on the game, I was expecting a Shining Force game that used the traditional Shining Force battle system. I don’t really care about the new artwork as long as the core gameplay is left intact, but if Sega has replaced it with a more trendy battle system, then I dare say I won’t welcome the change with open arms. All Sega needed to do was make a 3D Shining Force - not be swept up and dragged away by mainstream trends.
There’s an old saying which applies here: if it aint broken, don’t fix it. The Shining Force battle system that was originally programmed by Kan Naito, the lead programmer of the original Shining Force and head of Climax Entertainment, is synonymous with the Shining Force series. There was always room for improvement, but changing it (for whatever reason) would mean the death of the series.
[quote=“Rune Lai”]The artwork doesn’t really bother me at this point because it’s static and at this point in time is possibly even a mock-up of what they’re hoping the game will look like.
The 20+ characters actually sounds pretty good to me because one thing I liked about the Shining Force series is that it was possible to take quite a few people into battle with you. It was quite a shock for me when I first played Final Fantasy Tactics because my party was a tiny four or five people!
Truthfully, hearing that there’s yet another bright young heroine with a tragic past who’s in love with the main hero makes me wretch more than anything the artwork and battle system can do. :|[/quote]
Meryl is Max’s adopted sister, apparently. From what I can gather, the new Shining Force is a prequel to the original Shining Force (or a prequel to the God-awful Shining Force remake). Kane, Max’s older brother, is present (I believe), and Max himself looks younger than he did in Shining Force. For all I know it could be a remake…
Maybe Meryl will remain with the party until she’s unexpectedly impaled by the main villain halfway through the game. Only when she’s dead will Max suddenly realise she existed. LMAO.