LoM review

[Kimiko]

Review by Jeremy Parish: GameSpite Quarterly 6: The Most Underappreciated Games Of All Time

What do y'all think? Was LoM a victim of fans' expectations?

I wish Sony/Squeenix Europe would hurry up and release the PSN version of LoM over here already so I can play it again.

[Duran]

Gameplay-wise, it was excellent. However, it played like an MMORPG, by being too open, with short story arcs instead of a main plot.

[bastian]

With only secret of mana under my belt at that time, I was so excited to play another Mana game and preordered LoM and got a ps1 just for it... and then started playing it and hated it. I refused to finish it. Ten years later or so I finally forced myself to, but it was a task, not a pleasure. It was too far removed from what I loved about secret of mana so much (and, later sd3).

[Dr. Sheexy]

The first time I played it I was really confused, aside from the Mana Tree and the monsters I didn't really think it was that much of a Mana game. I was playing through with a friend so we kinda ignored all the story stuff. Later I borrowed it and played through some more and realized that it's got a great story and the combat, while slow, was actually really in depth and fun.
I still think of it as kind of the odd man out (well now Heroes of Mana takes that title, haha) but it's definitely a classic SD game in my eyes.

I really love LoM's environment and all the stuff you can do with pets, forging, golem building etc. It's really neat and I would love to see another SD game that followed in its footsteps, but maybe had a more open combat instead of locking you into screens with monsters.

But yeah, I think LoM definitely gets a lot of flak because it wasn't that similar to the previous 3 games, it didn't feel as structured and the gameplay was quite a bit different.

[Abdul_Moti]

Fortunately LoM was my first Mana game, so I wasn't influenced with such "underexpectations" many other fans had. Well it presented a 'new' horizon from previous three, so those who were influenced heavily would obviously get the shock therapy. Unfortunately I got the shock therapy as well when I played SoM, duh.

[ReasonsUnknown]

LoM was my favorite I think. At least according to how many times I played it. I loved creating my own weapons and armor, raising pets and such. The story arcs and side quests were well written, the scenery was beautifully painted, I liked the combat because I never made anything game breaking so there was always some kind of challenge. LoM was the fourth Mana game I've played, after the first 3, and I like them pretty much them all the same. I just tore LoM apart.

I dont often read reviews or pay attention to negative opinions because what other people think doesn't really matter to me when it comes to what I like and what they say I should like. But I think the fact that people got high expectations from the first 3 Mana games really affected LoM's reception. A lot of people that say it sucks, like a number of people I know, would admit it is a pretty good game if it had no connection to the Mana games they grew up with. Of course this isn't true for everyone, but I think it is for the majority of negative reviews.

[Abdul_Moti]

That be the reason I can hardly trust reviews..
no matter how 'objective' it is, still the 'subjectivity' remains due to reviewer's past experience with previous sequels and sort. it is one's right to expect better things at later stuff, but when it has something 'new' and 'different' from the previous ones, then it is easily turned down with less hope to see 'how it captivates fans' by its own way. to make it worse, these people expands influence by making their reviews, 'turning off' other fans and 'scare away' some new 'fan would be' from touching it.

that is what I see from LoM and other 'underappreciated' games, it is a pity that many still be either 'inside' or 'outside' the box, instead to perceive the box itself..