SaGa 2 (Final Fantasy Legend 2) for me. (Boss name spoilers)

When I was younger, I would not be able to defeat Venus, and even once I got past her, I would not be able to defeat Apollo, and hence could not reach the final area of the game.

However, I've become better at the game, learned the mechanics (even figured out the damage formula), and learned how to deal with these bosses, and can now beat the game without too much effort. These days, if playing the original Game Boy version, I like to skip part of the game with glitches instead of playing the game normally.

(Worth noting that one unconventional strategy I've found that I like is to use a human mage; I find that such a character actually works better than an esper mage in the long run (spellbooks are more powerful than the corresponding esper skills, and humans actually have better mana growth), and better than humans in other roles (if I want physical damage, I use a robot).)

Years later, I even imported the Japan-only remake and beat it without any fan translation. (The mechanics are similar, but there are still some changes, and the final boss is a lot harder in that version.)

Lol I feel ya, the Total Annihilation games are the only RTS games I'm genuinely good at. I'm not too terrible at Star Wars: Galactic Battlegrounds so I'm guessing I'd be alright at AoE. Other than that, though, the multitasking and quick thinking definitely overwhelms me at times.

Nice, the only Final Fantasy game I've played is one of the old school Gameboy ones. I was never much of a fan of JRPG combat and part of that is because I'm just awful at turn-based combat systems haha. I may have to give the series a fair shot sometime, though!

The game I am talking about is actually one of the Game Boy games, though it didn't have the "Final Fantasy" name in the title.

The main difficulties with SaGa 2 are the unconventional growth mechanics and the fact that there are some balance issues with the game. I discovered that AGI is far more important than STR, as there are weapons that use AGI for damage, and both STR and AGI based weapons need AGI to actually hit. Also, spells are really good except when you run into a boss that's immune to elemental spells.

SaGa 2 is still simpler than later games in the series, like the Romancing SaGa and SaGa Frontier games.

Oh nice, I don't remember which one I played lol. I've heard of Romancing SaGa but never knew it was part of that series!

Well, even though they're the same series, the series did evolve over the years.

SaGa 1: Simplest game in the series, though still rather unconventional, and definitely unrefined. Game is globally linear, with a tower connecting 4 major worlds and a bunch of smaller optional worlds. 3 different races with different growth rules. Also, this game is one of the shortest JRPGs out there; it also has some startling plot elements (especially for when it was made). Also, a precursor to LP, namely hearts, is found here; each character can only be cheaply revived 3 times.

SaGa 2: More refined version of SaGa 1, though the plot isn't quite as startling. There are now 4 races, and this is the first game in the series where your actions during battle affect stat growth. Hearts are gone, and death now wears off after a battle.

SaGa 3: The most conventional game in the series, as it has levels and experience points. It also features race changing and time travel. (The remake on the Nintendo DS got rid of levels and XP to make this game more like you'd expect for a SaGa game, but it kept the race changing and time travel.) First game in the series where you don't create your party, but instead have pre-made characters.

Romancing SaGa 1: Major change. The game is now non-linear, there's no separation of races (everyone uses the same growth rules), and technique sparking makes its first appearance here. Also, the series now settles on low-tech fantasy settings at this point (earlier games had some science fiction elements). The game is still rough around the edges, to my understanding. You choose one of 8 main characters, but the bulk of the game is the same.

Romancing SaGa 2: An evolution from RS1, but also has a generation system, much like Rogue Legacy. You control an emperor, and once they die, you can choose a successor. Notorious for one of the hardest final bosses in the series. Also notable is that stats don't increase through fighting, but your skill levels do, and later generations can benefit from the skill levels and sparked arts from earlier generations. Also, the first appearance of LP since SaGa 1.

Romancing SaGa 3: A more refined RS1, but with a few RS2 elements, notably the way stats and skills are handled (minus inheritance). Like RS1, you choose one of 8 main characters.

SaGa Fronter 1: Takes RS3, but adds back in some elements from the Game Boy games. Notable for having a heterogeneous world, where different regions have different levels of technology and magic (it's not often that you see a magic university and virtual reality in the same game). The 4 different races with different growth rules are back (though around half of the available party members, and 5 of the 7 main characters, are human). There are 7 main characters to choose from, each with a very different main quest; unlike RS1/RS3, the game changes completely with a different main character. (For example, Red's story is quite linear, while Lute's is nonlinear enough for you to reach the final boss early in the game and have to restart because you're not strong enough.)

SaGa Frontier 2: Back to a medieval fantasy setting (or perhaps it might resemble Rome a bit), and back to just humans. You choose events to play on the world map, in a somewhat linear fashion (but with two sides to the story), and just play through pieces of the world's history. (The game goes from 1220 to 1305.)

There's also Unlimited SaGa, which to my understanding is rather unconventional even by SaGa standards; I have not palyed it. (Then again, I haven't played any of the Romancing SaGas except for the PS2 remake of the first game, which reworked the game mechanics.)

Thanks for the info, I'll have to check it out! :)

More like: Genres. Way back I really tried to love RPGs, but I couldn't get into them. I blame lack of patience, not being proficient enough in English (and many fantasy-typical/historical words weren't in my dictionary...), and lots of numbers I didn't understand - and also the manuals of them games, ahem, got always lost back then. I loved running around in games like The Bard's Tale, Wasteland, Champions of Krynn etc, but since I couldn't understand them, I never got anywhere.

Nowadays it's my favourite genre, and the only reason I've not beaten more RPGs than any other type of game is that they're so darn long... ;-)

Nice! I've always loved RPGs myself, though it took me quite a bit of time before I really delved into the genre beyond my home territory of The Elder Scrolls because I didn't really grasp many of the mechanics. I used to be under the impression that RPGs absolutely had to be massive, open world sandbox experiences like TES but once I broadened my tastes, I love almost all types of RPG now!

True! I got the motivation to practice harder when I found Tetris championship videos that got quite famous last year (I think) on YouTube. If you haven't seen them, you should in your spare time. They're fun to watch!

Thanks for the suggestion, I never knew those existed haha. I'll have to add them to a playlist!

Dead by daylight. At first, I couldn't survive for more than a few seconds and I hated that feeling so much but now I have developed some skills and I enjoy playing this game.

Biggest change in game appreciation for me over the years is FMVs/CGs. I used to love watching them over and over. Nowadays, I barely have the patience. XD

But, on to the topic, Sim City 2000 is a game I first saw when I was 8 or 9, but over the years I couldn't figure out how to play it properly (There was also the language barrier, of course. I didn't really become a really good English speaker/reader until my late teens).

Cut back to some 4 or 5 years ago (maybe more?), and something clicked. Or, more specifically, I realized that 100% funding for services wasn't needed early in the game, so I stopped getting absolutely crushed by debt early on. XD I remember still struggling a little bit with the random money disappearing from my wallet, until I had a Power Plant explode on me and finally made the connection (the plants had been auto-rebuying themselves).

I had somewhat similar experiences with a few RTS as as well. Various versions of C&C, KKND Extreme, Sins of a Solar Empire, Civilization (though this one I blame Civ 4's autoworkers more than my own figuring things out myself), to say a few.

Someday I'll get around to learning one or more Total War games and/or Paradox's grand strategy games (both of which, I own quite a few).

Yes & No. Beat 'em Ups (Street Fighter, DOA, Soul Calibur etc). Always liked them though. Love on first sight of an Street Fighter machine in an Italian arcade game hall on a holiday. But I was always terrible at them and probably always will be :P

I've heard some positive stuff about it, I'd love to give it a shot at some time!

Haha yeah, I understand that, I only watch that sort of thing if it's important to understanding the game's story. As for SC, and city builders, I love them but I am absolutely awful at them and haven't improved much at all haha. I only have one Total War game (Shogun 2) and their formula is really complex but very awesome. As for Paradox's games, I have almost all of the main ones myself and my favorites are definitely Stellaris (which is in between 4X and grand strategy) and Crusader Kings (which appeals to me a lot, as an RPG fan). However, EU, Victoria and Imperator: Rome are all really solid games too!

I can relate to this, I did that in most every game. Though, to be fair, it was just because I hated challenge as a kid lol

Ah yeah, I'm alright at the older Mortal Kombat games (especially if I get Raiden) but other than that, I've never been very good at any others!