Verifying Chrono Brake trademark in Japan

[ZeaLitY]

Hah, yeah, I've got Kato's quote about 'what did the Chrono series mean to these people' referenced at Wikipedia. It's bound to make someone mad, but visitors can't really change it since it is sourced.

Well, that completes the references. This was a pretty illuminating experience. The Chrono Community comparatively looks like a walled in pit of bullcrap compared to these results; I'm not going to look inward that much any longer when searching for useful information. Thanks.

[Radien]

Kato really said that?...

Damn, now that really is rude in my opinion. ¬_¬; I've replayed Chrono Trigger more than any other RPG, and also enjoyed Chrono Cross. I believe I understand the meaning of both quite well, on multiple levels, and yet I quite sympathize with most of the complaints of people who dislike the changes.

Usually when a series innovates, they move on to the next stage, keep what innovations were good, ditch the ones that weren't good enough to keep, and add even more innovations. Chrono Trigger had innovations, but it makes no sense to say that the spirit of the series is that no two games have any close resemblance. CC could have kept the innovations of CT's battle system quite easily: combo techs, a small party that interacts heavily with eachother, and area-based attacks.

Heck, practically every innovation outside of battle was kept: multiple endings, New Game+, visible enemies, enemy-free overworld maps, and multiple connected worlds/eras. Most of what they ditched (that was actually an innovation, anyway) was the battle system, the party structure, and actual time travel... (the last of which was more of an event model than a gameplay innovation)

I suppose you could cite Radical Dreamers, and point out that it wasn't even an RPG, whereas CC was........but that would be to imply that the only purpose of Chrono is to tell a story, regardless of format. I think that story is definitely not the only thing which makes the series remarkable.