Gamer Limit Banner


Kotaku has reported that the Latest issue of Famitsu that the PSP will be getting the latest rendition of Game Art’s Classic RPG, Lunar: The Silver Star.  Originally released for the Sega CD, the first Lunar (and its sequel) have seen remakes on the Sega Saturn, Playstation One, and an interesting Game Boy Advance version.

Hit the jump for the Famitsu screenshot.

This is the screenshot Kotaku was so nice to share with everyone:


The new PSP version, Lunar: Harmony of Silver Star, is going to sport enhanced visuals with updated music and art.  There hasn’t been any word on a American or European release date.

With Persona and Lunar: The Silver Star both getting remakes it looks like new and old fans will be able to play these expensive RPGs at a reduced price.

What RPGs would you guys like to get a new makeover or should they be working on new titles?

Source: Kotaku

  1. Very cool! Might have an excuse to finally check this one out!

  2. This looks damn awesome!!

  3. Fact: Lunar 1 and 2 are the most magical, absorbing RPGs ever made in terms of straight characters.

    • avatar Karima

      Too many players want to steal from or kill wmeoevhr they want, without it impacting their gameplay. But to me, that’s hopelessly illogical. If you want to play a hero-type, then you should do only hero-type things, or at least refrain from evil deeds. On the other hand, if you want to play a sociopath, you should accept that it’s going to severely impact gameplay.Designing a game for wannabe sociopaths will probably mean that it’s completely unrealistic for everyone else. Sure, it might be a fantasy, but the game still must follow logically from its premise. And to me, one of the most important things in a game is that the player’s actions should have realistic consequences ( realistic, given the setting and the premise of the game, of course).But I understand that there are a lot of adolescents, bullied or laughed at in school, who want to be feared in their fantasies. And I suppose a game designer must take that into account (but hopefully without dumbing down the whole thing for everyone else).

  4. I would say “they” (as in Game Arts) should be working on new titles, but their most recent outings that I can remember – Grandia 3 and Lunar: Dragon Song – were outrageous disappointments to me.

    In any case, this sounds like it could be good, but I’m too much of a Working Designs fanboy to admit that it could be better than the PSX version. Still, at least I can recognize that I’m unreasonable about it. :P

  5. avatar Eric

    Hey. Spent a fair while reading here, but this’ll be my first post. Nice blog, btw! I find the seubjct matter you write about/comment on interesting.Anyway, yeah I agree that we shouldn’t be limiting our concept of evil to just those who feel the need to kill all the NPCs and generally act like a psychopath (although you’d certainly want to include them). IMHO, a PC’s personal alignment should be based on what sacrifices they are prepared to make (theirs, or others’) in their dealings with others. For example, the stereotypical RPG quest where someone promises the PC a reward in return for getting them out of a bad situation should have no effect on their alignment. A situation where the PC actively steps on someone else to get what they want would have a negative impact. A situation where the PC is asked to give up some valuable artefact or a large portion of wealth, or take on a challenge that is a bit out of their depth in order to help them would result in a positive impact. The bottom line, it should be difficult to be good (Ie have some real cost to the player), easy to be neutral and beneficial to be evil. Of course, there’d be other facets to playing a good or evil character. A good character naturally lends itself to working in a group of other good-guys . Evil characters will find themselves shunned by such characters and also find it hard to trust other evil characters, thus they would have to rely on intimidation, greed, mutual advantage, etc in order to work with others.Aside from that, I also think that merely good or evil is too simple a model for NPCs to work off (in terms of reactions). You really limit what responses you can see in that case. I’d be more in favour of a PC accumulating scores against a number of reputation attributes. For example: likelihood of using violence to resolve situations, perceived good/evil, attitudes towards the opposite sex, attitudes towards authority, dealings with particular factions/races, perceived gullibility, reliability of completing jobs, discretion, dealings with their acquaintances, rumor, etc. Different NPCs would have their own preferences and react accordingly. Definitely more work and creativity involved here, but a richer and more diverse experience would be the result. In that case, you’d really see the results of playing characters with different approaches to situations.

Leave a Reply