[mag]

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

Sorry, what you really mean is...the bigger the stakes, the harder it is for a story to have intimate character development, which is the only thing that can make anyone really CARE about those big stakes in the first place. And Squaresoft lacks the talent to pull it off.

No. How high the stakes are has nothing to do with how easy or difficult it is to have good character development. In fact, some of the best character development I've ever seen has been in epic stories.

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

Saving the world is NOT a genre, it's part of a STORY. It does tell you about the story, despite what you say. It tells us that we are going to be watching a group of people attempt to save the world.

So I guess to you, Final Fantasy VII, Armageddon, Thirteen Days, The Lord of the Rings, The New Testament, and Star Trek IV are all pretty much the same story.

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

Well mag, if you care about generic, cardboard cutouts then fine by me.

They're not cardboard cutouts, though. They're all based on familiar personality types--that's what gives them such a broad appeal. But if you actually keep playing, you find that there's more to their stories than just those archetypes.

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

Spoiler:

I can assure you not everyone was sad about Aeris' death, I was glad she was gone. I was upset when Sephiroth died, he was the best thing about the game.

Well, that's probably because you're a sadist.

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

Really? No wonder you like the Final Fantasy games. "Full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." One of these days, two characters really talking (not serving as tools for the hack writer to convey endless exposition) won't annoy you so much mag.

I guess you're not quite smart enough to figure out when I'm mocking you. Sorry. I forgot who I was dealing with. I'll try to come down to your level so you can keep up with me.

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

Ha ha, nice try mag. It was a childish insult, and no amount of covering it up now will make me feel any less victorious. It's even more satisfying now that you actually tried to go back and quote me out of context. LOL. Keep it up, please.

I don't need to cover up anything. I thought it was a pretty good insult.

Originally Posted by tabacco

So basically, what you're saying is that your whole argument comes down to your own personal taste, rather than some broader artistic opinion.

Of course it's my opinion. I think that should be obvious since I'm the one saying it.

mag

[Once A Villain]

Originally Posted by mag

No. How high the stakes are has nothing to do with how easy or difficult it is to have good character development. In fact, some of the best character development I've ever seen has been in epic stories.

That doesn't mean much coming from a guy who has spent his last few posts proving that he has no idea what good character development is.

Originally Posted by mag

So I guess to you, Final Fantasy VII, Armageddon, Thirteen Days, The Lord of the Rings, The New Testament, and Star Trek IV are all pretty much the same story.

Not entirely, no. But they have similarities, one of them being the end of the world aspect, and the other being that the majority of those you named are terrible. The few that aren't so bad feature writers or filmmakers more talented than anyone working at Square.

Originally Posted by mag

They're not cardboard cutouts, though. They're all based on familiar personality types--that's what gives them such a broad appeal. But if you actually keep playing, you find that there's more to their stories than just those archetypes.

Keep playing? I've completed every FF game in existence (except FF11, which can't really be completed), and that includes a ridiculous period in my life where I actually went back to beat FF7 again getting most of the characters to LVL 99 because I heard that Sephiroth's difficulty scaled with Cloud's LVL. Of course, that wasn't true at all. I killed Sephiroth in two attacks (one for the first form, and one for the second...both attacks were Knights of the Round, but still...). Which brings me to another complaint about the FF games...they are insultingly easy. Square panders to the interests of mainstream gamers in two respects: 1. They make their games easy so that first time RPGers can get into them (more sales!). 2. They design their plots and characters with the sort of simplistic, heroic "broad appeal" that makes teenagers salivate.

Originally Posted by mag

Well, that's probably because you're a sadist.

Uh, no... I didn't like Aeris because she wasn't interesting at all (aside from her musical theme, which was quite good especially in the full orchestra version on the Reunion CD). I liked Sephiroth because he was interesting by Square standards...I kept wanting him to show up because he was providing the only energy to the whole thing.

Originally Posted by mag

I guess you're not quite smart enough to figure out when I'm mocking you. Sorry. I forgot who I was dealing with. I'll try to come down to your level so you can keep up with me.

LOL! Ouch man... I hate to break it to you, but it was YOU that missed the fact that not only did I know you were mocking me...I was mocking you back. Sad, sad... This is way too easy.

Originally Posted by mag

I don't need to cover up anything. I thought it was a pretty good insult.

Cool. As long as you admit that you're the one using insults. That's all that matters. And I think you can do even better too, so keep 'em coming.

[tabacco]

Originally Posted by mag

I guess you're not quite smart enough to figure out when I'm mocking you. Sorry. I forgot who I was dealing with. I'll try to come down to your level so you can keep up with me.

Whoops... this is where the mod in me gets to step in. I don't want to see any of that. Argument is fine, but let's not drag it down to this level, okay?

[mag]

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

That doesn't mean much coming from a guy who has spent his last few posts proving that he has no idea what good character development is.

But it didn't come from you. It came from me.

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

Not entirely, no. But they have similarities, one of them being the end of the world aspect, and the other being that the majority of those you named are terrible. The few that aren't so bad feature writers or filmmakers more talented than anyone working at Square.

The point is that all of those stories are worlds apart from each other. So trying to lump them all together into this ridiculously broad "save the world" category is just absurd.

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

Keep playing? I've completed every FF game in existence (except FF11, which can't really be completed), and that includes a ridiculous period in my life where I actually went back to beat FF7 again getting most of the characters to LVL 99 because I heard that Sephiroth's difficulty scaled with Cloud's LVL.

And yet, the whole thing seems to have gone completely over your head.

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

Which brings me to another complaint about the FF games...they are insultingly easy.

Only the more recent ones. And even those aren't so easy for the average gamer. What you have to understand is that most people aren't going to take the time to get their entire party up to level 99. If you're fighting Sephiroth at level 40, it's a little more difficult.

Originally Posted by tabacco

Whoops... this is where the mod in me gets to step in. I don't want to see any of that. Argument is fine, but let's not drag it down to this level, okay?

Well, what fun is that?

mag

[Once A Villain]

Originally Posted by mag

The point is that all of those stories are worlds apart from each other. So trying to lump them all together into this ridiculously broad "save the world" category is just absurd.

Ha ha, see I disagree. They are actually all very much the same, except a few among them feature great characters, dialogue, etc. to lift them above FF levels. I'm not saying it can't be done. I'm not saying those types of stories can't be good. But I don't care if the world is ending via nuclear weapons, asteroids, disease, aliens, whatever...it's all in the same ballpark. I felt the same way back in the "natural disaster" movie craze. You know...Twister, Volcano, Dante's Peak, Armageddon, Deep Impact, etc. They were all different, but they were all the same. They all create the same crisis for characters to deal with. How can we avoid getting sucked into a tornado? How can we get away from this lava? How can we escape this falling rock? Three very different threats, but three very identical threats when it comes to the story and how the characters react under the circumstances.

Originally Posted by mag

And yet, the whole thing seems to have gone completely over your head.

No, the problem is that I was able to comprehend how simplistic it was. You, on the other hand, failed.

Originally Posted by mag

Only the more recent ones. And even those aren't so easy for the average gamer. What you have to understand is that most people aren't going to take the time to get their entire party up to level 99. If you're fighting Sephiroth at level 40, it's a little more difficult.

They are still easy. Please recall that it was my second time through the game when I got my characters to LVL 99. The first time through they were nowhere near that, and I mowed through Sephiroth like he wasn't even there.

[Hammerite]

Fight!fight!fight!fight!fight!fight!fight!fight!fi ght!fight!fight!fight!fight!fight!fight!fight!

[mag]

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

Ha ha, see I disagree. They are actually all very much the same, except a few among them feature great characters, dialogue, etc. to lift them above FF levels.

Star Trek IV is the same story as the New Testament, huh? That's a new one. I suppose once a person is so fargone that they're willing to say something that ridiculous, no amount of reason will help.

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

But I don't care if the world is ending via nuclear weapons, asteroids, disease, aliens, whatever...it's all in the same ballpark. I felt the same way back in the "natural disaster" movie craze. You know...Twister, Volcano, Dante's Peak, Armageddon, Deep Impact, etc. They were all different, but they were all the same. They all create the same crisis for characters to deal with. How can we avoid getting sucked into a tornado? How can we get away from this lava? How can we escape this falling rock? Three very different threats, but three very identical threats when it comes to the story and how the characters react under the circumstances.

Those natural disaster movies are different, though. They were really never about characters or plot as much as they were about cool special effects. But there are a lot of stories that are about saving the world, and the stories themselves are all very different. It can just be about, "Hey, how do we stop this thing from destroying the planet?" That's the way that Armaggeddon went. But just as, if not more often, it's about other things. The Lord of the Rings, for instance, is more of an allegorical mythology about good and evil. Thirteen Days is more of a political drama. The New Testament is much more philosophical. Star Trek IV is about the humor. In most of these stories, the fact that the fate of the world is at stake isn't what's important. It's simply a plot device that the writer uses to get the characters where they need to be.

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

No, the problem is that I was able to comprehend how simplistic it was. You, on the other hand, failed.

You're saying it's too simple for me to comprehend? Is that supposed to be an insult? That doesn't even make sense.

Anyway, you can't really say that Final Fantasy VII doesn't have enough character development. That's ALL it is! It's the whole frikkin' game. It's all about the characters. There's a handful of expository conversations about Meteor and the Lifestream, and everything else is about the characters. Just like the stories mentioned above, it's not really about how they're going to save the world from Sephiroth. It's about the characters--how they react to these events, how they react to each other.

And I guess you just didn't notice this, but NONE of the nine main characters (with the only exception I think being Vincent) is the same person at the end of the game as they are at the beginning. Did that just happen by magic all of a sudden? No. That's what we call "character development." It's what they spent the whole 40 hour game doing.

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

They are still easy. Please recall that it was my second time through the game when I got my characters to LVL 99. The first time through they were nowhere near that, and I mowed through Sephiroth like he wasn't even there.

Well, a game doesn't have to be hard to be fun. I don't think they were trying to make the next Contra. Square's not as sadistic as Konami is. Go fight the Weapons if Sephiroth's too easy for you.

mag

[Once A Villain]

Originally Posted by mag

Star Trek IV is the same story as the New Testament, huh? That's a new one. I suppose once a person is so fargone that they're willing to say something that ridiculous, no amount of reason will help.

Not exactly the same, no. But anything that deals with the end of the world is going to be similar in many ways (usually too many ways). For one, you know that people are going to be trying to prevent the end of the world. For two, you know the scope is going to be huge and that, generally, character development won't be as good as a result. And since the majority of these types of stories suffer from the latter issue, they aren't very interesting. That's why I'm not fond of them overall, while I openly admit they can be great and some have been. Just not the Final Fantasy games...

Originally Posted by mag

Those natural disaster movies are different, though. They were really never about characters or plot as much as they were about cool special effects. But there are a lot of stories that are about saving the world, and the stories themselves are all very different. It can just be about, "Hey, how do we stop this thing from destroying the planet?" That's the way that Armaggeddon went. But just as, if not more often, it's about other things. The Lord of the Rings, for instance, is more of an allegorical mythology about good and evil. Thirteen Days is more of a political drama. The New Testament is much more philosophical. Star Trek IV is about the humor. In most of these stories, the fact that the fate of the world is at stake isn't what's important. It's simply a plot device that the writer uses to get the characters where they need to be.

Yes, and it's an old plot device that, judging by how the majority of stories turn out that employ it, should be retired. Ok...that's going a bit too far. But here's an idea... I'll just say that perhaps Square should try something new for once. All of their plots certainly feel the same... Their best was probably Xenogears though, if memory serves.

Originally Posted by mag

You're saying it's too simple for me to comprehend? Is that supposed to be an insult? That doesn't even make sense.

Anyway, you can't really say that Final Fantasy VII doesn't have enough character development. That's ALL it is! It's the whole frikkin' game. It's all about the characters. There's a handful of expository conversations about Meteor and the Lifestream, and everything else is about the characters. Just like the stories mentioned above, it's not really about how they're going to save the world from Sephiroth. It's about the characters--how they react to these events, how they react to each other.

And I guess you just didn't notice this, but NONE of the nine main characters (with the only exception I think being Vincent) is the same person at the end of the game as they are at the beginning. Did that just happen by magic all of a sudden? No. That's what we call "character development." It's what they spent the whole 40 hour game doing.

What I mean is that you are overrating the depth of the story. You aren't comrehending the fact that in actuality, it's very simple. And another thing I dislike about Square...if they're going to take 40 hours to tell a story, it damn well better be good. They tell a story in 40 hours that can't hold its own against many 2 hour movies... I'm not saying the characters never changed in FF7, I'm saying that all of the drama and "development" was so simplistic, especially considering the amount of time the story took to tell, that it doesn't deserve to be considered effective storytelling.

Originally Posted by mag

Well, a game doesn't have to be hard to be fun. I don't think they were trying to make the next Contra. Square's not as sadistic as Konami is. Go fight the Weapons if Sephiroth's too easy for you.

I beat Emerald and Ruby, no problem. It's no fun for them to be harder than the main villain though. Oh, and speaking of main villains in Square games...is it some sort of requirement that 90% of their final boss characters must have wings (at least one, usually two) and battle to the sounds of chanting music? This was cool in Final Fantasy VI (even though I remember Chaos in the very first FF having wings too), but started getting old in FF VII, and older still in FF Tactics, FF VIII, IX, Xenogears, etc...

[syntheticgerbil]

Mag, I really want to say I'm glad that there is someone else out there who has a refined view on liscensing exploits and Disney animation.

I'm a classic Warner Brothers fan myself.

And this thread really doesn't apply to me since I can't play turn based RPGs without getting really bored, so uh... carry on.

[Hammerite]

I thought it was funny when Elmer Fudd had the 'wabbit detector'

[sethsez]

For the record, my favorite Disney cartoon is Fantasia. Now, if there's a Fantasia novel then feel free to correct me here, but I'm pretty sure it's not based on classic literature.

And come on, I don't like Stephen King and he's still miles above the tripe that is Final Fantasy. Even when he did his huge end of the world novel (The Stand) it managed to not insult my intelligence like Final Fantasy insists on doing every step of the way.

HERE BE SPOILERS FOR THE TWO OF YOU WHO HAVEN'T PLAYED FFVII-X YET STILL CARE ABOUT THIS:

When Aeris died (which was handled quite poorly... it was blatantly obvious that she was going to die due to a sudden deluge of character development and "here's what I want to do with my life" statements) we got some of the most laughable post-death dialog I've ever seen from Cloud ("she'll never laugh another laugh, never breathe another breath" and on and on and on). One of the main characters was a stuffed animal that also happened to be a spy. We also got a vampire-esque guy who sleeps in a coffin, a big black guy with a heart of gold who's sole defining trait was speaking in ebonics, Cloud's love interest who was half breasts and no personality, and Yuffie, who was beyond pointless.

And how about FFVIII? GFs damage memory?! It was never brought up before, it was never brought up again, but it does allow for a stupid and highly implausible plot twist, so it's okay! It's not a plot contrivance at all. This isn't even getting into a romance that's less believable than your average bodice-ripper, a main character with all the charm of a slug, and no less than three complete airheads mucking up the party.

FFIX was decent because it didn't take itself seriously, so all the stupidity was easier to overlook. It was still full of anime cliches and high school play drama, though.

FFX had an interesting premise. It also had an eye-searing art style (who the hell designed those costumes and why isn't he dead yet), voice acting that made me cringe just slightly less than Shenmue ("Hey Ryu, want a dog" still edges out "HA HA HA HA HA" for me), and far too many distractions from the main goal (we've got a limited amount of time to get all the summons so we can stop Sin and save the world? Let's play Blitzball, dodge lightning, and just generally constantly deviate from our path!). And of course the main goal was yet another Big Evil Monster With Connections To The Heros, which has really worn out its welcome as a plot device (oh my, Tidus has a connection with Sin, I never saw that coming!). Finally, whatever dignity the end of the game had (and it was the best part of the story) was undermined by X-2. I'm not even going to get into how generic Yuna was, how annoying Rikku was, or how lame Lulu was. Auron was okay until it became clear that he existed just for the sake of being walking portent with no depth beyond that.

Final Fantasy games are long, complex, and involved. Each game has a pretty labyrinthine plot. Of course, this also applies to Dragon Ball Z, and I don't see anyone trying to compare that to great literature.

Well, aside from fourteen year old boys.

[syntheticgerbil]

Man, you're awesome too!

[mag]

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

What I mean is that you are overrating the depth of the story. You aren't comrehending the fact that in actuality, it's very simple.

I don't see how I'm the one who's having trouble with comprehension since, obviously, I'm getting more out of the game than you are.

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

I beat Emerald and Ruby, no problem. It's no fun for them to be harder than the main villain though.

I think it's good that way. The people who just want to finish the game can do so without spending hours leveling up, and for the people who want more of a challenge there's something extra.

Besides, no RPG is really challenging if you play it right. RPGs don't require skill as much as persistence. If your level is high enough, then the boss is easy. If your level isn't high enough, then it's hard. It's as simple as that.

Originally Posted by sethsez

For the record, my favorite Disney cartoon is Fantasia. Now, if there's a Fantasia novel then feel free to correct me here, but I'm pretty sure it's not based on classic literature.

No, that's an example of their other kind of cartoon--the Mickey Mouse kind. Although, now that I think about it, I've never actually seen Fantasia. I should probably see if I can track down a copy since everybody always talks about it. All the clips I've seen have been musical pieces. So if Mickey doesn't speak, it might actually be good.

If you listened to someone scratching a chalkboard it wouldn't be as annoying as Disney's characters.

Originally Posted by sethsez

Spoiler:

When Aeris died (which was handled quite poorly... it was blatantly obvious that she was going to die due to a sudden deluge of character development and "here's what I want to do with my life" statements)

Well, if you saw that coming, you're pretty much the only one. I think that's the first time something like that has ever happened in a video game. Besides, Aeris didn't talk any differently at the end of Disk 1 than she did at the beginning, so I don't see how that makes much of a difference.

Originally Posted by sethsez

Spoiler:

we got some of the most laughable post-death dialog I've ever seen from Cloud ("she'll never laugh another laugh, never breathe another breath" and on and on and on).

Well, for one, that's not exactly what he said. You've changed, either in your memory or on purpose, to make it sound more ridiculous. And I'll admit that a lot of the dialogue seems to have gotten lost in translation. But I actually think it turned out pretty good that way. It feels a lot more natural, like somebody who's just saying these things as they come to mind. It's not like other dramas where the character just all of a sudden pulls some Shakespearian soliloquy out of his ass.

Originally Posted by sethsez

We also got a vampire-esque guy who sleeps in a coffin, a big black guy with a heart of gold who's sole defining trait was speaking in ebonics, Cloud's love interest who was half breasts and no personality, and Yuffie, who was beyond pointless.

That's a pretty neat trick. Of course, you can make any character sound bland depending on how broadly you define their personality.

Originally Posted by sethsez

Spoiler:

And how about FFVIII? GFs damage memory?! It was never brought up before, it was never brought up again, but it does allow for a stupid and highly implausible plot twist, so it's okay! It's not a plot contrivance at all. This isn't even getting into a romance that's less believable than your average bodice-ripper, a main character with all the charm of a slug, and no less than three complete airheads mucking up the party.

The thing about the GFs actually isn't contrived at all. If you had been paying attention, you'd realize that it's actually a critical part of the story. Although, I will say that Final Fantasy VIII did suffer from some pretty boring and annoying characters. Only a handful of the characters were really interesting, but it turned out to be a pretty decent story in spite of that.

Originally Posted by sethsez

And of course the main goal was yet another Big Evil Monster With Connections To The Heros, which has really worn out its welcome as a plot device (oh my, Tidus has a connection with Sin, I never saw that coming!).

Um...that's not really much of a mystery. We know that Tidus has a connection with Sin pretty much from the beginning. The real question is...

Spoiler:

...how did Tidus' father become Sin?

Originally Posted by sethsez

Finally, whatever dignity the end of the game had (and it was the best part of the story) was undermined by X-2.

That much we can at least agree on. X-2 sucked huge amounts of ass.

Originally Posted by sethsez

Auron was okay until it became clear that he existed just for the sake of being walking portent with no depth beyond that.

You've got to be kidding. Auron is a great character! He's one of those wonderfully tragic figures.

Originally Posted by syntheticgerbil

Mag, I really want to say I'm glad that there is someone else out there who has a refined view on liscensing exploits and Disney animation.

I'm a classic Warner Brothers fan myself.

See, now the Looney Tunes characters have good voice acting and are actually funny. For the rest of you, here's the difference:

Funny ... Annoying ... Funny ... Annoying

See the difference?

mag

[tabacco]

If you say so, but the fact that you don't know what Fantasia is makes me really doubt the credibility of your artistic judgement of Disney's past works. You seem to think the whole film is the Sorcerer's Apprentice, which it most certainly is not. Learn about a subject before you critique it, eh?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fantasia_%28movie%29

[mag]

Originally Posted by tabacco

If you say so, but the fact that you don't know what Fantasia is makes me really doubt the credibility of your artistic judgement of Disney's past works. You seem to think the whole film is the Sorcerer's Apprentice, which it most certainly is not. Learn about a subject before you critique it, eh?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fantasia_%28movie%29

I know what it is. I've just never seen it. It was released over 40 years before I was born, and I just was never interested enough to track down a copy.

And I wasn't critiquing it. I'm just saying that if it involves Mickey speaking, it can't be that good.

mag

[tabacco]

Originally Posted by mag

I know what it is.

No, you don't.

And I'm through trying to argue with you. Your tendency to turn simple matters of personal taste into sweeping artistic judgement are getting on my nerves (case in point: "if it involves Mickey speaking, it can't be that good")

[sethsez]

Originally Posted by mag

I know what it is.

"All the clips I've seen have been musical pieces" indicates that, at the very best, you have a limited understanding of what Fantasia is. Of course everything you've seen is musical clips... that's all Fantasia is.

I'm just saying that if it involves Mickey speaking, it can't be that good.

James Joyce was a hack because I said so. Influence and historical significance be damned.

[sethsez]

Originally Posted by mag

Well, if you saw that coming, you're pretty much the only one. I think that's the first time something like that has ever happened in a video game.

Video game? Not really (especially if you count PC games, but major characters have died in JRPGs before), but in movies it's a cliche as old as the medium itself. Any time a character in the middle of a war says that after the fighting is over he'd like to do [sentimental thing] you can bet that he'll die in either the next scene, or near the end of the movie (if he shows a locket with his wife's picture inside it, you also get a bonus last wish of "please give this to my wife" right before he bites it). This is supposed to make you go "oh no, all his hopes and dreams are gone" but generally it makes the more jaded among us reply with "oh great, that trick again."

That's a pretty neat trick. Of course, you can make any character sound bland depending on how broadly you define their personality.

But that's all there is TO the characters in Final Fantasy VII outside of Cloud and Sephiroth. Sure, they have some hastily thrown together backgrounds, but they don't evolve in any meaningful way and we get precious little insight into them at all. I defined them broadly because they're broadly defined in the first place.

The thing about the GFs actually isn't contrived at all. If you had been paying attention, you'd realize that it's actually a critical part of the story.

Yes, it is a critical part of the story, which is why it's such a lame plot element. If it were a minor point I wouldn't have minded the stupidity as much.

Although, I will say that Final Fantasy VIII did suffer from some pretty boring and annoying characters. Only a handful of the characters were really interesting, but it turned out to be a pretty decent story in spite of that.

Decent compared to what? It was a character-driven story with annoying characters, and an epic apocalyptic story with an almost completely undefined villain and a threat so banal it doesn't even feel dangerous (seriously, time compression?!). If a romantic epic fails as a romance and fails as an epic, then I generally consider that a failure, not decent.

You've got to be kidding. Auron is a great character! He's one of those wonderfully tragic figures.

Nope, I still think he exists almost entirely to be portent on legs. He doesn't piss me off like the rest of the cast, though.

[mag]

Originally Posted by tabacco

No, you don't.

Oh YEAH?

Originally Posted by tabacco

And I'm through trying to argue with you. Your tendency to turn simple matters of personal taste into sweeping artistic judgement are getting on my nerves (case in point: "if it involves Mickey speaking, it can't be that good")

It's MY post! Whose opinion did you think I was going to give?

Dear AdventureGamers,

I am writing to you on behalf of musician Norah Jones. Norah would like you all to know that she likes Mickey Mouse very much. He is, in her words, "the cutest."

Thank you for your attention. You may now carry on with your discussion.

I mean, this is what frustrates me about this board. And obviously, this doesn't apply to everyone here. But some of you just can't stand someone having a different opinion. Heaven forbid that someone say something even vaguely negative about the gods Mickey Mouse, Richard Dean Anderson, or Tim Schafer. Let's not accept that they have a genuinely different opinion about the matter and have an actual exchange of ideas. Let's browbeat the heathen until he accepts the "correct" opinion.

Originally Posted by sethsez

"All the clips I've seen have been musical pieces" indicates that, at the very best, you have a limited understanding of what Fantasia is. Of course everything you've seen is musical clips... that's all Fantasia is.

That's pretty much what I thought, but as I said, I've never seen the movie. So I don't really know whether or not there's dialogue. Excuse me for not having seen every movie ever made.

Originally Posted by sethsez

James Joyce was a hack because I said so. Influence and historical significance be damned.

Well, James Joyce was a hack, but for different reasons.

And I really don't see why I should think that something is good just because it happened to be first.

Originally Posted by sethsez

Video game? Not really (especially if you count PC games, but major characters have died in JRPGs before)

"Major" characters? There were characters who died in games before that, but Final Fantasy VII was the first one I can think of where it happened to someone the player actually cares about.

Originally Posted by sethsez

but in movies it's a cliche as old as the medium itself. Any time a character in the middle of a war says that after the fighting is over he'd like to do [sentimental thing] you can bet that he'll die in either the next scene, or near the end of the movie (if he shows a locket with his wife's picture inside it, you also get a bonus last wish of "please give this to my wife" right before he bites it). This is supposed to make you go "oh no, all his hopes and dreams are gone" but generally it makes the more jaded among us reply with "oh great, that trick again."

The impact is totally different when it's a character that the player actually controls.

Besides, it doesn't always work the way you point out. Just as often it's simply said to show the viewer what it is the character is fighting for, and that character does actually make it all the way to the end of the story. MOST of the cahracters in FF7 talked about what their aspirations, and it wasn't just to set them all up to be killed.

Originally Posted by sethsez

Yes, it is a critical part of the story, which is why it's such a lame plot element. If it were a minor point I wouldn't have minded the stupidity as much.

I think you missed the point.

Spoiler:

It's not a contrivance. The whole reason they're together together in the future is because of their battle with Ultimecia in which they went back in time and started SeeD from their old orphanage. It's a time loop.

I thought FF8 was actually a pretty creative take on the whole time travel story.

mag

[sethsez]

Originally Posted by mag

That's pretty much what I thought, but as I said, I've never seen the movie. So I don't really know whether or not there's dialogue. Excuse me for not having seen every movie ever made.

Fantasia was Walt's ultimate achievement, and it was what he'd been working towards for years prior to actually making it. Criticizing the artistic merits of Disney without seeing Fantasia is like criticizing Francis Ford Coppola without having seen The Godfather.

"Major" characters? There were characters who died in games before that, but Final Fantasy VII was the first one I can think of where it happened to someone the player actually cares about.

Chrono Trigger springs to mind, if only because the death scene was actually pulled off well (although that game wimped out by allowing an optional ressurection). Final Fantasy IV also had some good death scenes.

I thought FF8 was actually a pretty creative take on the whole time travel story.

The whole time loop thing is actually pretty standard time travel stuff. And really, that was the basis of the very first Final Fantasy as well.