all games are not created equal

Let me start by saying I haven't finished FFXIII yet.  But I feel quite certain that even once I have completed it, FFX was the better game. 

FFXIII is linear to the extreme.  Most JRPGs are linear but give the illusion of choice.  Talking to NPCs and going into and out of cities makes the story feel more free; less urgent.  however, in FFXIII there is no interaction with NPCs and no exploring.  The plot is constantly ongoing and it feels as though the characters never get a rest. 

The battle system doesn't make it all up.  FFXIII has a great new battle system.  It is challenging and entertaining and can be quite complex.  This is a great plus for a game that makes you fight in many many battles on the linear path.  There just isn't a lot of variation.

FFX and FFXIII have great stories where you begrudgingly become attached to the characters.  These epic stories drive the gameplay more than any other aspect.  For an RPG that is great but it should drive play along side entertainment and strategy; not despite it.

Lastly, FFX allowed for development of characters as you would like.  Thus far, FFXIII has taken the character development in a linear direction.

FFXIII plays out like a book being read to you. 
FFX plays like a book being written by you.

Simply put, Warcraft 3 failed to live up to its predecessor. 

W2 was an awesome sequel to the original and really expanded, not only the storyline and plot, but the playable units as well.  It increased the strategy portion of the game and added a new frontier with water units.  It was a great game for its time and probably the best RTS until Starcraft.

W3 lacked in nearly every aspect.  It's story was weak.  It focused so much on the heroes that it made the strategy feel awkward.  C&C does a good job or increasing the units abilities with experience but in W3 that balance is off.  I just ended up trying to kill everything with my hero to get its level up.   

My hope is that Starcraft 2 does not do what Warcraft 3 did.

Diddy Kong racing was awesome!  Like Mario Kart the game was entertaining as both a multiplayer and single player game.  It had all of the same great characteristics and charm. 

However, unlike Mario Kart, DKR had an awesome story, challenges to unlock, and a sweet world to explore.  DKR also had multiple vihicle to use race with.  The boat was nothing special, but the plane was great. 

Mario Kart was an awesome game and the levels in 64 were great, but it just didn't go far enough.  It failed to make the game deeper with a story line.  IMO it just wasn't as challenging as DKR either. 

Both were great games, but DKR took cart racing to another level.

Eternal Sonata is an oft over looked JRPG that has a lot of really good qualities.  Lost Odyssey is also a JRPG which is simply run-of-the-mill.

ES has a wonderful story, top notch gameplay and combat system, and has a little something for everyone, without making any particular piece boring.  The only down side to ES is it's incredibly childish fell.  The combat system alone makes up for this however.  Combat is active and very much skill based.  You can win or lose a fight based off of how well you know your characters and their strengths and weaknesses. 

LO is quite predictably setup.  The combat system is familiar and it leaves little action within combat to chage the course of the fight.  The story is strong and meaningful but if you are not big into stories than LO is really overkill.  At some points you will have small chapters to read, and it reads like a book.

Overall, ES wins of LO because it creates a desire to continue playing.  I will admit that i got about 70% of the was through LO before I simply quit.  But after beating ES last year, I have returned again to see if I could beat it again. 

Mass Effect has a wonderfully enthralling story that makes you want to continue playing despite the weak combat system.  Fable 2 has nearly no story at all and derives all of its entertainment from capabilities outside of the main story line.

Both games have significant weaknesses in my opinion.  However it is fable 2 that really fails in my mind to live up to expectation.

Fable 2 allows for the exploration of a world and gives you the ability to become whoever you want to be.  Kill innocents, bad points.  Kill bandits, good points.  The problem is this formula is too simple.  There are no complex decisions in Fable 2 whatsoever.  Instead the game stays shallow.  This is not to say that it isn't fun.  Fable 2 is very entertaining for the first 8-10 hours, but after that you realize the simplicity and stop playing there.

Mass Effect on the other hand has a very deep story that keeps you guessing.  The management of your characters status (good/evil) relies on making complex decisions and, in some case, forces you to make a decision in which you don't know if the outcome is for good or evil.  However, the combat system is so weak that it makes fighting nearly no fun at all.  If you are all about action and don't care much about the story, ME will bore you instantly.

All that being said, ME has replayability that F2 just doesn't.  Both games needed 8-12 months more in development.  But in the end, it is F2 really disappoints.