Gaming The Final Fantasy Thread

What's your favourite single-player FF?

  • Total voters
    214
I guess it depends on whether you consider influence and importance as relevant criteria, because Final Fantasy 7 is one of the most influential games ever made. I thought it was better, but at such a young age I think I was swayed far more easily by the 'wow' factor of 7.

I'd say Final Fantasy hit greater heights for me, although it definitely dragged at some points. I still youtube 'Phantom Train' sometimes for a huge hit of nostalgia. Personally though, I'd say that I actually preferred 4 than 6, with 7 being atop the list. Without Final Fantasy 4, I doubt I'd have got into the series at all, and probably would have missed out on some great JRPG titles since through the complete ignorance that a lot of modern gamers show.

EDIT: As for Chrono Trigger, I'm not sure it holds up today for somebody who has never previously played it. I tried it and concluded that 'it must have been great for its time'. I can generally appreciate games that now seem dated but offered a lot, but usually they are still fun experiences today and I didn't get that from Chrono Trigger.
 
Alock1 said:
I guess it depends on whether you consider influence and importance as relevant criteria, because Final Fantasy 7 is one of the most influential games ever made. I thought it was better, but at such a young age I think I was swayed far more easily by the 'wow' factor of 7.

I'd say Final Fantasy hit greater heights for me, although it definitely dragged at some points. I still youtube 'Phantom Train' sometimes for a huge hit of nostalgia. Personally though, I'd say that I actually preferred 4 than 6, with 7 being atop the list. Without Final Fantasy 4, I doubt I'd have got into the series at all, and probably would have missed out on some great JRPG titles since through the complete ignorance that a lot of modern gamers show.
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with any of that, it's all subjective. Both 6 and 7 had massive waves of publicity around them, but 6 was just so much better than anything before it in every way. 7 took the graphics and atmosphere with the fmv to the next level on that front, but was disappointing in other ways. Both absolutely amazing games.

You are lucky you said 4 though! Any other FF and I'd have called you a horrible name :lol: Great game, have you played the DS remake?
 
Alock1 said:
EDIT: As for Chrono Trigger, I'm not sure it holds up today for somebody who has never previously played it. I tried it and concluded that 'it must have been great for its time'. I can generally appreciate games that now seem dated but offered a lot, but usually they are still fun experiences today and I didn't get that from Chrono Trigger.
Click to expand...

I only played Chrono Trigger relatively recently(perhaps 2 years ago, can't remember), and while it's a fantastic RPG, it's not on FF's level, not the better FF's anyway.
 
Revan said:
No way. I know that it is cool nowadays to say that Chrono Trigger is the greatest thing to ever exist, but I call it bullshit. There isn't a single part of the game (protagonist, antagonist, characters, music, story, game mechanics) when Chrono Trigger is better than FF7 and dare I say even FF9 is superior in all those aspects. Probably for that time it was so great (especially the graphics which were absolutely fantastic for a SNES game) but I think that it has been surprassed by other games. Seriously, to each with his opinions but I think that it fall short in every aspect if you compare it against FF6, FF7 and FF9. Still a very good game though and I enjoyed it so much.
Click to expand...
It's a good thing that I don't care what you think then.

'These days'. I played the fecking thing 10 years ago!
 
Redlambs said:
Nothing wrong with any of that, it's all subjective. Both 6 and 7 had massive waves of publicity around them, but 6 was just so much better than anything before it in every way. 7 took the graphics and atmosphere with the fmv to the next level on that front, but was disappointing in other ways. Both absolutely amazing games.

You are lucky you said 4 though! Any other FF and I'd have called you a horrible name :lol: Great game, have you played the DS remake?
Click to expand...

I've only played the originals for all of them. My replays have mostly been through emulation on my phone and a number I've played through again on the Vita. I might have to recommit to this again, I replayed 7, 8 and 9 on the Vita - perhaps it's time to go back to 4 and 6.

Yeah, I think I preferred 4, although that opinion could easily be swayed they're pretty much neck and neck. I'd have to conclude 6 is the better game, but I have so much to thank for 4. I would never have played Shadow of the Colossuss and Kingdom Hearts if it wasn't for FF4.
 
Redlambs said:
I'm not going through it all again right now, far too many times over the years have I done this and it's the same arguments vs the same arguments. Like I say when I get time I'll hunt down my all encompassing post because you'll find it easier responding to that mate.

May I ask how you played 6 though and when? I.e emulator?
Click to expand...


Twice on an emulator yeah, and I acknowledge that this will partially detract from the experience. Nevertheless, I have seen a fair bit of a SNES FFIII and the points made stand regardless of emulation; it surely cannot be argued seriously that there is any comparison between the narrative in FF7 and FF6 when you really analyse what the story of 7 encompasses. It's not just a matter of twists, but also intricacy, intelligence and depth. The game is leading you on or purposely confusing you about 3 huge issues almost right from the offset; Cloud's identity, the nature of Jenova/Sephiroth and the trigger for Sephiroth's madness. Those three characters/figures in themselves are written with far more care than their FF6 counterparts, as their backstory crafted a whole load of plot that had already happened before the game even begins.

When you look at Kefka for example, the real extent of him is that he's an ex-magitek knight gone mad. That's good and I like him as a antagonist, but it's a very basic background and set of motives in comparison to what Sephiroth/Jenova are about. Aside from the gulf in characer and plot complexity though, the points about the materia system, the heights of the challenge with regards to the weapons, etc all stand regardless of emulation.

Redlambs said:
I didn't criticise it for it's difficulty, though I'd say 6 was a bit more difficult if you stick to the dedicated save points (as you had to do on cart). This is why I need to find my post because in it I ramble on for ages about the challenge in both games, getting the bestout of the different magic systems, finding the best and hidden stuff and all that. 7 was rightly criticised at the time for being a bit more walk-through, whereas 6 was more a game where you had to work to learn all the cool stuff.


Remembering all along there was no internet for hints and tips at the time too! Plus there was nothing really like either game that worked in quite the same way. It's easier looking back now having played some of the games we have in the modern time than it ever was back then. That's something that the likes of yourself and Eric will never be able to factor in, 6 really did move the entire genre to a peak and as great as 7 was when the dust settled there was plenty people and magazines had to say at the time.
Click to expand...

I don't think the hints and tips thing really sits right as a point for a comparison - that is societal and not really to do with the actual games themselves. Nevertheless, I don't think I ever referred to any sort of guide for FF7 or 6 when first playing, and appreciated the heightened difficulty in exploration in 6, as well as the far superior sidequests of FF7.

As for any point regarding when 6 was played, this is something that can be twisted in various ways. You could say that playing a game a long time after it has been released puts you in a better posiiton to view it for what it is and not for what it was was when it came out. You could also say playing FF7 after 6 removes any expectations of what 7 should've been like and makes you analyse it more for what it is as a game in itself. There are a whole variety of justifiable perspectives to take up here - none of which are necessarily right. That being said, I know people older than myself who do have the perspective of having played FF6 back then who are of the same view.

Anyway, I'm not even arguing here that 7 is better. I think it is, but the main point is that there is far too much in favour of 7 over 6 for there to be any clear cut certainty in stating 6 as better.
 
Such Wiener said:
It's a good thing that I don't care what you think then.

'These days'. I played the fecking thing 10 years ago!
Click to expand...

You care about IGN opinion then :lol:

Such Wiener said:
I've played all the FF games (and I mean all, SNES included) and I tink I can safely say, they are, and will always be the greatest gaming series I've ever played. VII alone is the greatest game ever made, and bar a few hiccups (VIII anyone?) they're all quite brilliant.


I'll be getting myself a PS3 for XIII, but seeing as it's out later this year in Japan, I won't have to get one for another 2 years...
Click to expand...
 
See you seem to want to get into a deep discussion about it, but right now I really haven't the time.

But you do have a habit of suggesting what I may say then arguing against it and going around in circles in one post. It makes it difficult to even want to discuss things sometimes :lol:

You missed the point about being in a position to learn how to play FF6 first though. Fact of the matter is you were far more used to the game mechanic playing games like 7,8,9 and all that before 6, so that does sway opinion. Not really sure how that can be argued really.

As for your point on the story, are you seriously suggesting that everyone has to agree they preferred 7? I thought some of the surprises were more obvious really, but whatever. Yeah the narrative was more defined, but with the far lesser amount of characters and the way they were able to convey more emotion through the amazing fmv surely helped that along.


edit: obviously to Eric.
 
Alock1 said:
I've only played the originals for all of them. My replays have mostly been through emulation on my phone and a number I've played through again on the Vita. I might have to recommit to this again, I replayed 7, 8 and 9 on the Vita - perhaps it's time to go back to 4 and 6.

Yeah, I think I preferred 4, although that opinion could easily be swayed they're pretty much neck and neck. I'd have to conclude 6 is the better game, but I have so much to thank for 4. I would never have played Shadow of the Colossuss and Kingdom Hearts if it wasn't for FF4.
Click to expand...

I agree mate, 4 often gets overlooked in the discussions but it set off so much.
 
Revan said:
You care about IGN opinion then :lol:
Click to expand...
Opinions change, don't they? That was five years ago (were you even born then?).
I replayed them all around two years ago.

If you see the IGN thread, I predicted the top two before they were even announced ;)
 
Such Wiener said:
Opinions change, don't they? That was five years ago (were you even born then?).
I replayed them all around two years ago.

If you see the IGN thread, I predicted the top two before they were even announced ;)
Click to expand...

Fair enough, I remember it. Was just joking!
 
Redlambs said:
See you seem to want to get into a deep discussion about it, but right now I really haven't the time.

But you do have a habit of suggesting what I may say then arguing against it and going around in circles in one post. It makes it difficult to even want to discuss things sometimes :lol:

You missed the point about being in a position to learn how to play FF6 first though. Fact of the matter is you were far more used to the game mechanic playing games like 7,8,9 and all that before 6, so that does sway opinion. Not really sure how that can be argued really.

As for your point on the story, are you seriously suggesting that everyone has to agree they preferred 7? I thought some of the surprises were more obvious really, but whatever. Yeah the narrative was more defined, but with the far lesser amount of characters and the way they were able to convey more emotion through the amazing fmv surely helped that along.


edit: obviously to Eric.
Click to expand...


Not saying anyone has to prefer anything, but if you're to actually measure the two against each other I think it's fair to say that one is pretty much objectively better as narrative, and by a fair distance. It's not the surprises so much as the layers and the background to the plot - it's no wonder they spun off Crisis Core, because such an inventive story was already written before the game began. As for the FMV, it is such a tiny part of the experience that it doesn't even come to mind, to be honest.

I'm not trying to go round in circles, by the way; I'm more questioning the resilient certainty there seems to be that FF6 is unambiguously better. I've said that FF6 has the advantage of exploration and lesser linearity, but I've also said that FF7 bests or equals that in every other facet. I still don't think this point about when a game is played is fully justifiable in a logical sense either - it implies some sort of general rule that a person must be affected in some deep way by playing different game mechanics, and that is impossible to look past this afterwards. It doesn't follow that this should have some great impact on expectations, opinion and enjoyment, and as such is a problematic assumption.
 
KingEric7 said:
Not saying anyone has to prefer anything, but if you're to actually measure the two against each other I think it's fair to say that one is pretty much objectively better as narrative, and by a fair distance. It's not the surprises so much as the layers and the background to the plot - it's no wonder they spun off Crisis Core, because such an inventive story was already written before the game began. As for the FMV, it is such a tiny part of the experience that it doesn't even come to mind, to be honest.

I'm not trying to go round in circles, by the way; I'm more questioning the resilient certainty there seems to be that FF6 is unambiguously better. I've said that FF6 has the advantage of exploration and lesser linearity, but I've also said that FF7 bests or equals that in every other facet. I still don't think this point about when a game is played is fully justifiable in a logical sense either - it implies some sort of general rule that a person must be affected in some deep way by playing different game mechanics, and that is impossible to look past this afterwards. It doesn't follow that this should have some great impact on expectations, opinion and enjoyment, and as such is a problematic assumption.
Click to expand...

It's because yet again you've completely missed the point and made a post of assumptions mate.

You claim you haven't heard a compelling argument, yet here you are making up your own argument and then arguing against it. Read what I actually said again ;)
 
I'm reading that playing 7, 8, 9 after 6 will sway opinion and influence judgement. Here:

You missed the point about being in a position to learn how to play FF6 first though. Fact of the matter is you were far more used to the game mechanic playing games like 7,8,9 and all that before 6, so that does sway opinion. Not really sure how that can be argued really.
Click to expand...

I have disagreed that this must happen, whilst going into at least a little depth as to why certain aspects of 7 are somewhat objectively stronger. What have I missed?
 
KingEric7 said:
I'm reading that playing 7, 8, 9 after 6 will sway opinion and influence judgement. Here:



I have disagreed that this must happen, whilst going into at least a little depth as to why certain aspects of 7 are somewhat objectively stronger. What have I missed?
Click to expand...


I'm talking in terms of how you approach the game and the enjoyment you get out of it. Not how you necessarily judge it finally overall to a fine detail.

Think about it, 6 did a whole lot of things new to the genre and practically changed it. Surely if you are experienced with the games further in the series, some of which had even deeper ways of doing things like magic systems, it wouldn't better prepare you for 6 and the challenge it presented and experience it gave?

You seem to want to list each feature one by one and try to put a quantifiable figure on it. You've said you are yet to encounter a good argument for 6 (which surely cannot be correct and gives away how forceful you want to be with your own opinion). Neither of those are good starts for a real debate on either game anyway, the way you further put arguments into people's mouths then go around in circles within your own posts on the matter makes it very much a subject that I just really can't be arsed with again and again.


Like I say if I can find my post on it, then I'll let you have at that. If not I'll summarise later.
 
Redlambs said:
I'm talking in terms of how you approach the game and the enjoyment you get out of it. Not how you necessarily judge it finally overall to a fine detail.

Think about it, 6 did a whole lot of things new to the genre and practically changed it. Surely if you are experienced with the games further in the series, some of which had even deeper ways of doing things like magic systems, it wouldn't better prepare you for 6 and the challenge it presented and experience it gave?

You seem to want to list each feature one by one and try to put a quantifiable figure on it. You've said you are yet to encounter a good argument for 6 (which surely cannot be correct and gives away how forceful you want to be with your own opinion). Neither of those are good starts for a real debate on either game anyway, the way you further put arguments into people's mouths then go around in circles within your own posts on the matter makes it very much a subject that I just really can't be arsed with again and again.


Like I say if I can find my post on it, then I'll let you have at that. If not I'll summarise later.
Click to expand...


I'm not trying to be a nobhead about it; it's a debate I've had a lot and I find it interesting. Just ignore if you think it's dragging.

As for your point, are we not then talking about what games offered relative to the time here, and not just as games themselves? Surely the only fair way to measure the actual quality games is to take out backstory and context, and to attempt to measure it simply in terms of what they offer as if they were released on the very same day? Otherwise we're surely introducing a social context which, really, exists outside of the game and not within it.

That requires a bit of imagination, but I think this discussion is more moving towards considering enjoyment and achievement in a relative sense. I understand the point but think there are problems in using that line of reasoning - it's more contextual and shifts the emphasis on the era rather than the game itself. I imagine it's comparable to assessing football between different eras, and taking greater enjoyment out of watching George Best nutmeg someone than Lionel Messi. George Best's nutmeg against West Brom was practically famous and, in some senses, he was a real innovator in football, yet every person I've spoken to has seen them both will agree Lionel Messi is better, despite finding George Best more thrilling due to how much he stood out amongst the era.

Would that analogy sit right with you? Just as George Best would be more thrilling to watch in a comparably under-developed era of football, Final Fantasy VI would perhaps be more enjoyable to some in context of that era of gaming and development than later games.
 
KingEric7 said:
I'm not trying to be a nobhead about it; it's a debate I've had a lot and I find it interesting. Just ignore if you think it's dragging.
Click to expand...

I know mate, you know I respect your opinion on this more than most and enjoy your passion. It's just you go waaaay beyond points and argue like you've had this discussion before and know what anyone is going to say.

Point in case is below:


As for your point, are we not then talking about what games offered relative to the time here, and not just as games themselves? Surely the only fair way to measure the actual quality games is to take out backstory and context, and to attempt to measure it simply in terms of what they offer as if they were released on the very same day? Otherwise we're surely introducing a social context which, really, exists outside of the game and not within it.

That requires a bit of imagination, but I think this discussion is more moving towards considering enjoyment and achievement in a relative sense. I understand the point but think there are problems in using that line of reasoning - it's more contextual and shifts the emphasis on the era rather than the game itself. I imagine it's comparable to assessing football between different eras, and taking greater enjoyment out of watching George Best nutmeg someone than Lionel Messi. George Best's nutmeg against West Brom was practically famous and, in some senses, he was a real innovator in football, yet every person I've spoken to has seen them both will agree Lionel Messi is better, despite finding George Best more thrilling due to how much he stood out amongst the era.

Would that analogy sit right with you?
Click to expand...

See you've again put my argument into my mouth and then come up with an analogy to suit. That doesn't sit right with me, because that's not what I'm saying. You picked one point and surmised that I'm basically saying its about the time you play these games. Which isn't my point, I used that specific example in relation to how you experience the game for the first time in relation to how complex/advanced you find it.

You cannot possibly argue, for example, that by playing the like of 7/8/9 before 6 it didn't help you find 6 easier and at times possibly more basic because of that? Which does then skew your opinion on that area. I'm not saying you like 7 more because you played it first, I'm saying it certainly makes it harder to appreciate 6 in the same way someone like myself does. We agree that the fannies out there (of which there are many) who like 6 because it's cool to like 6, are utter idiots.


Playing games for me is about gameplay first. The story, emotion, experience all round and how they leave lasting memories is obviously highly important too. You are an aspiring writer and so see it in another light. This is what you need to remember here, this is subjective and as such you need to leave behind the pre-conceived notions you've got from a previous discussion and read what's in front of you.
 
Redlambs said:
Yep!

Though any real Final Fantasy purist will tell you that the real discussion is between 4 and 6 anyway. Alock knows what I'm talking about ;)
Click to expand...

Hmmmm, between them two, I'd almost go for 4, Cecils story and growth is something beyond most(if not all) videogames, and could just as easily be an epic fantasy book(and by book I mean trilogy, cnut fantasy writers...).

I've been thinking about where 5(as always, highly underrated) fits in. It reminds me of 9 a lot, well, the lighthearted adventure aspect to 9. They both have their serious and sad/tragic points, but really have this fun romp feel to them.

EDIT: Also, I guess I'm no real purist, but then I'd never claim to be one.
 
Earthquake said:
Hmmmm, between them two, I'd almost go for 4, Cecils story and growth is something beyond most(if not all) videogames, and could just as easily be an epic fantasy book(and by book I mean trilogy, cnut fantasy writers...).

I've been thinking about where 5(as always, highly underrated) fits in. It reminds me of 9 a lot, well, the lighthearted adventure aspect to 9. They both have their serious and sad/tragic points, but really have this fun romp feel to them.

EDIT: Also, I guess I'm no real purist, but then I'd never claim to be one.
Click to expand...


The purist thing wasn't mean to be taken with any seriousness :)

5 is underrated in the scheme of things I agree. I don't think 9 is though, most seem to agree it's one of the best. But in a bunch that includes 4,6 and 7, it's hard for 9 not to finish outside the medals. In my opinion of course.
 
Redlambs said:
Yep!

Though any real Final Fantasy purist will tell you that the real discussion is between 4 and 6 anyway. Alock knows what I'm talking about ;)
Click to expand...

I already said I think FF7 is better :P

It really just depends on what criteria you're basing it off. FF7 had more wow, more influence, and was definitely more consistant. FF6 hit higher heights and had some of the best moments I've ever played but at times it also dragged, and because I'd already played 4 - it didn't have the same 'wow' that 4 and 7 did.

I should probably play them again to make a more informed judgement; since I was really young and far more easily influenced by the look of a game - but for now, I'm in the FF7 crowd.
 
Redlambs said:
The purist thing wasn't mean to be taken with any seriousness :)

5 is underrated in the scheme of things I agree. I don't think 9 is though, most seem to agree it's one of the best. But in a bunch that includes 4,6 and 7, it's hard for 9 not to finish outside the medals. In my opinion of course.
Click to expand...
Aye, I had guessed as much, I came across a tad too serious there, should have had a ;)

No, 9 is well rated, though tbh, I could see an argument for it being the best of the lot, as everything about it(barring the card game) is perfection or near it. It's almost a Final Fantasy highlights package. What I meant by 5 reminding me of it was in the games themselves, rather than their regard.
 
Earthquake said:
Aye, I had guessed as much, I came across a tad too serious there, should have had a ;)

No, 9 is well rated, though tbh, I could see an argument for it being the best of the lot, as everything about it(barring the card game) is perfection or near it. It's almost a Final Fantasy highlights package. What I meant by 5 reminding me of it was in the games themselves, rather than their regard.
Click to expand...

It's like you say it really amusing how here we are trying to find pros and cons with some of the best games ever made :lol:
 
Redlambs said:
I know mate, you know I respect your opinion on this more than most and enjoy your passion. It's just you go waaaay beyond points and argue like you've had this discussion before and know what anyone is going to say.

Point in case is below:




See you've again put my argument into my mouth and then come up with an analogy to suit. That doesn't sit right with me, because that's not what I'm saying. You picked one point and surmised that I'm basically saying its about the time you play these games. Which isn't my point, I used that specific example in relation to how you experience the game for the first time in relation to how complex/advanced you find it.

You cannot possibly argue, for example, that by playing the like of 7/8/9 before 6 it didn't help you find 6 easier and at times possibly more basic because of that? Which does then skew your opinion on that area. I'm not saying you like 7 more because you played it first, I'm saying it certainly makes it harder to appreciate 6 in the same way someone like myself does. We agree that the fannies out there (of which there are many) who like 6 because it's cool to like 6, are utter idiots.


Playing games for me is about gameplay first. The story, emotion, experience all round and how they leave lasting memories is obviously highly important too. You are an aspiring writer and so see it in another light. This is what you need to remember here, this is subjective and as such you need to leave behind the pre-conceived notions you've got from a previous discussion and read what's in front of you.
Click to expand...


I see where you're coming from now. A pretty key element of 6 definitely is more basic though, and that is the levelling/magic system. There's another perspective to consider here, too - you could actually argue that anyone who played FF6 before FF7 was already prepared for the undoubtedly more complex materia system, and that anyone who had already played FF1-6 could never appreciate the challenge that FF7 provided for someone who had not had that 'training'. It's not the same as going from more complex mechanics to less complex ones, but nevertheless this is a valid extrapolation of the logic that suggests experience can impact other titles in the series. Magic systems, items, the ATB system, etc... You would surely have to somehow play FF6 and FF7 simultaneously in isolation without having played any other games in the series to get a real feel for the actual difficulty and proper experience of the games themselves, otherwise it could be suggested that playing FF1-6 affected the experience that 7 provided, just as 7/8/9 affected 6. It's not implausible that when it got to 7 that there was no actual jump or decrease in gaming difficulty, and that playing something of equivalent difficulty to 6 made for a quicker learning curve and easier experience. This would, in turn, skew the perception of difficulty in a similar way. Your point remains about my experience of FF6, but you can expand this point and apply it in different ways.

That seems a somewhat Cider-ish argument looking at it, but I think it stands. :lol: If the experiences from 7, 8 and 9 are taken into account, then 1-6 must be also considered in reference to future games even if they are less complex. As for the rest of the gameplay, the linearity aspect (or lack thereof) definitely presents a superior element to exploration in FFVI, but FFVII trumps it as far as the sheer variety and depth of sidequest goes. That's why I think FF7 is the better game, to be honest; I haven't found the difference in gameplay to be significant, yet the difference in the narrative running through it (as well as the depth/background of certain characters), in my opinion, is large.

I've never disagreed with that last bit about it being 'subjective', by the way; just that I see it as difficult to argue that 6 is a superior game in terms of what it actually offers in isolation (or, in reference to this discussion, as much isolation as can be envisaged...). The fact that there are different perspectives actually supports this outlook, and I've always stressed the part perspective plays with these games when people have said FF6 is unquestionably the best.

*A final point to round off, actually - I found FFV more challenging than FFVI, VII and VIII.
 
Earthquake said:
In 6, can't you skip rebuilding your team, and go straight for the final dungeon?
Click to expand...


Never tried it. Would've thought there'd be complications though in that the ending theme itself caters for every character. That big medley shifts to each character's theme as they come on screen.

Another one for the list, actually... :lol:

*You can do something like this on Chrono Trigger by the way (in the sense of skipping stuff). If you're some sort of ridiculous and random badass you can complete it within hours.
 
Redlambs said:
Yep!

Though any real Final Fantasy purist will tell you that the real discussion is between 4 and 6 anyway. Alock knows what I'm talking about ;)
Click to expand...

Only if you take into context the year of release. Maybe FF4 was revolutionary and very likely it was better than everything else until that time (by everything else I mean any video game in whatever genre you want, and saying maybe because I don't know it for sure cause it was launched the same year I was born) and so very likely it had a big influence in other video games (including FF6 and FF7). Also, the Cecil story was phenomenal and if it wasn't for a particular Cloud Strife, he would have been the best protagonist on FF series. Also, I think that it was a bit more challenging than the other FF games I played (and I played the US version which was a bit more easy).

But if you take into context only the game (without considering the year of release) then I think is hard to argue that it is a better game to FF6, FF7 and possibly FF9. The story is quite good but not as deep as in those other games, the main antagonist wasn't good IMO, and the companions were good but only Rydia was really memorable. A honorable mention must go to Fusoya, which might have been influenced Aeris moment. But that's it. In the game mechanis it isn't even close. FF4 has the simplest fighting system in any RPG I have played (at-least in any Square game I have played). You exactly know what every player might do and it's a bit boring in that aspect. You wait for Rosa to heal cause she can't do anything else, Kain jumps, Edwards throws things etc. They aren't as customizable characters as in other games, when characters are experts at some things, but they can do a good job in others too. I liked FF4 but I wouldn't say that it is in the same class as 6, 7 and even 9.
Earthquake said:
In 6, can't you skip rebuilding your team, and go straight for the final dungeon?
Click to expand...

You can. After you'll get Sabin and someone (you start with Celes) I think that you might skip the others, though it doesn't make that sense and it will make the game more difficult but less enjoyable.
 
Revan said:
You can. After you'll get Sabin and someone (you start with Celes) I think that you might skip the others, though it doesn't make that sense and it will make the game more difficult but less enjoyable.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, it'd be foolish to try it, but still, quite an interesting quirk. Perhaps it's handy that you can pick up the ones you want and get on with business.
 
Earthquake said:
Oh yeah, it'd be foolish to try it, but still, quite an interesting quirk. Perhaps it's handy that you can pick up the ones you want and get on with business.
Click to expand...

Also, the best 'side quests' in the game are actually gathering your party members. You don't want to miss it, especially not the mages tower.
 
So what I can make out Young Cloud was just a massive, filthy pervert? I still don't really understand his story. I've literally just got him back in my party if anyone would care to explain what has actually been revealed up until that point. Obviously, if it involves anything I may find out shortly then keep quiet, but I just get the feeling I haven't understood something as opposed to there being more to reveal.

Who the feck is Zack? :lol:
 
Oh, and to join in the banter. I remember a game called Mystic Quest. It was amazing,
 
Woodzy said:
So what I can make out Young Cloud was just a massive, filthy pervert? I still don't really understand his story. I've literally just got him back in my party if anyone would care to explain what has actually been revealed up until that point. Obviously, if it involves anything I may find out shortly then keep quiet, but I just get the feeling I haven't understood something as opposed to there being more to reveal.
Click to expand...
In other words, a young guy.
Woodzy said:
Who the feck is Zack? :lol:
Click to expand...
An absolute don.
 
Woodzy said:
So what I can make out Young Cloud was just a massive, filthy pervert? I still don't really understand his story. I've literally just got him back in my party if anyone would care to explain what has actually been revealed up until that point. Obviously, if it involves anything I may find out shortly then keep quiet, but I just get the feeling I haven't understood something as opposed to there being more to reveal.

Who the feck is Zack? :lol:
Click to expand...


This was a big moment. :D

Cloud joined Shinra to impress Tifa and to fight next to Sephiroth. He claimed for 5 years that he had achieved this, and that he had fought with Sephiroth and become 1st Class.

This was a load of bollocks though. What actually happened was that he failed to become a proper first class soldier, and instead became a shitty Shinra solider who fought next to Zack - the actual person that fought with Sephiroth, and also Aeris' boyfriend. Cloud took on this personality in part out of shame and and deluded himself into believing he had Zach's career with Shinra. Tifa knew this was bollocks, because when Soldier and Sephiroth did come to Nibelheim, it was Zack that appeared and not Cloud (Cloud had the uniform on). The bit you've just been through is when Cloud realises he was actually the shitty Shinra soldier, and that it was he who actually 'killed' Sephiroth in Nibelheim when Sephiroth lost the plot, where as Zach was the one who confronted him in the chamber with Jenova (hence why Cloud could not remember what happened afterwards when he retold the story in Kalm).

As for Sephiroth, this means that you've not actually been chasing the proper Sephiroth all along, because Cloud threw him in the Lifestream. It's actually Jenova taking Sephiroth's form...being controlled by Sephiroth. The reason all these weirdos have flooded to Jenova for the 'reunion' is because, like Cloud, they were injected with Jenova's cells, which means that Jenova and, as a result, Sephiroth, are able to control them. This is why Cloud gave Sephiroth the black materia, why Cloud tried to kill Aeris, why he has been constantly moving towards Jenova/Sephiroth, etc - he is unconsciously and sometimes forcefuly being led towards them, and it is his weak, artificial personality that has made him susceptible to this (I think...).

There's one last thing to know at this point, and that's that Sephiroth's entire rampage on Nibelheim was done off the back of a mistaken assumption from a scientist called Professor Gast. From what I remember, Gast concluded that Jenova was an ancient, and that Sepiroth assumed, because of this, that he too was an ancient (and therefore the last surviving ancient). The Cetra (ancients) were abandoned by humans many years ago and died trying to defend earth from a calamity from above, and Sephiroth therefore believed it was his duty to avenge his ancestors by destroying the people that left them. Jenova was not an ancient though, and was actually the thing that fell from the sky! Gast made a mistake and Sephiroth destroyed Nibelheim because he believed him (remember the scene in the library at Nibelheim).

There's probably more to be honest, and I wouldn't worry if you didn't pick on up much of that. Only got all of it by my last playthrough and I've played it a shite load!

*Edited that for clarification:

Cloud did not kill him; he threw him in the Lifestream. It's just that he was gone for so long that people assumed he was dead.
 
Final Fantasy rox, they're all great, especially 7, Alock1 owns me at Sonic Racing, 6 is also brilliant, Tales of Vesperia is good, PlayStation rulez, Dragon Quest is brilliant, Redlambs is a twat, Final Fantasy rox again.

All the thoughts of EarthQuake.
 
KingEric7 said:
Cloud did not kill him; he threw him in the Lifestream. It's just that he was gone for so long that people assumed he was dead.
Click to expand...
I'd say it's fair enough to say he killed him, as it destroyed his original body and ended him as a human/humanoid, once he merged with the Lifestream he became something beyond.
Alock1 said:
Slight derail of thread - looking at 360 marketplace - replay of Jade Empire or try Final Fantasy XIII-2, Phantasy Star Universe, Tales of Vesperia?

Whoever picks for me, I'll edit this off-topic post and insert your views on Final Fantasy series and the obligatory call out Redlambs for being a bit of a prat.
Click to expand...
I'd take a punt on Tales of Vesperia, if you like the battle system they're great games.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.