Final Fantasy 12 is a great game, but I am not here to talk about that. What really gets to me is how one of the things that makes it great is the battle system. They ditched the normal Active Time Battle in favor of some sort of ATB/Real time hybrid. It works. It works well. So what is wrong? The first time I played FF12 I made the comment outloud "this plays like Parasite Eve." The battle system was much a parasite eve decendent. That doesn't bother me at all. I liked Parasite Eve. So what is my problem? Well when I look back to the old reviews of Parasite Eve I find that the battle system was one of the most critizied parts of the game. Prehaps Parasite Eve was ahead of its time by about eight years. I doubt it. The battle system worked just as well then as it did in FF12.
That brings me to my actual reason for this post. People don't know what they like. In most cases they stick to what is familiar. In other cases they have to be told what to like. Back in 1998 or 1997 or whatever year PE was released people were not used to such a concept as the battle system. The people rejected it. People didn't want it. I blame the fall of many great ideas do to peoples unwillingness to look, or accept due to unfamiliarity.
Another example: the Sega Game Gear was a great portable system. It had color, backlit screen, better graphics, and better sound then the Gameboy. Why did the Game Gear fail? Aside from some minor techniciial issues it was because it didn't have the name Nintendo on it, and it lacked a fat plumber squashing things with his butt.
This brings me to another point I wish to make. We look some games with undeserved favorable eyes. Not every Final Fantasy game should be rated high, Halo 3 does not deserve to be rated 9.5, and you would find it hard to convince me that every Mario game is a masterpeace.
Here is what I am saying "don't like (or dislike) something simply because it is different. You might be missing the next big thing."
Now if you will excuse me I am going to take my own advice and buy a Wii.