[Once A Villain]

Originally Posted by mag

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.

Yeah, that's definitely the Square method. Have you tried many RPGs by other companies or... See, a lot of RPGs are designed to sort of keep you at around the same level as your opponents unless you want to spend days or even weeks levelling, while even then you might not defeat the boss because you lack the right combination of classes, etc. I enjoy the way the Dragon Quest games work. You make a lot of choices and use a lot of strategy to defeat the bosses.


By the way, I figured I would just mention to fans of Fantasia that my favorite sequence is The Night on Bald Mountain. Splendid stuff.

[squarejawhero]

Night on Bald Mountain here too. Fantastic visuals and animation.

[sethsez]

I think that's just about everyone's favorite.

[mag]

Originally Posted by sethsez

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.

Even if I watched Fantasia and absolutely loved it, that would still only be one out of Lord knows how many Disney cartoons I've seen. So I don't think it wouldn't really change my opinion of Disney in general.

Although, a purely musical film probably would be perfect for Disney. They get to focus on the music and animation that they do so well without having to worry about the things that they suck at, like "writing."

Originally Posted by sethsez

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 don't think characters who come back to life really count. And the deaths in FF4 were pretty good, but I don't know if you can really call them "major" characters. If I recall correctly, most of them were only in the party for short periods of time. It wasn't as though any of the characters that we actually cared about died.

Originally Posted by sethsez

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.

Yeah, I know that. I didn't mean the time loop. I just meant the way they approached it in general. As time travel stories go, I'd definitely say it's one of the best. Hell, I didn't even know it WAS a time travel story until about halfway through.

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

Yeah, that's definitely the Square method. Have you tried many RPGs by other companies or... See, a lot of RPGs are designed to sort of keep you at around the same level as your opponents unless you want to spend days or even weeks levelling, while even then you might not defeat the boss because you lack the right combination of classes, etc. I enjoy the way the Dragon Quest games work. You make a lot of choices and use a lot of strategy to defeat the bosses.

Yes, I've played other RPGs. I have yet to come across a problem in any RPG where leveling up isn't the solution.

mag

[Once A Villain]

Originally Posted by mag

I don't think characters who come back to life really count. And the deaths in FF4 were pretty good, but I don't know if you can really call them "major" characters. If I recall correctly, most of them were only in the party for short periods of time. It wasn't as though any of the characters that we actually cared about died.

Ummm... I dunno.

Spoiler:

Didn't Tellah die in FF4? That old wizard?

Perhaps I'm wrong, but I remember being quite surprised and upset when SOMEONE died in FF4. I think it was him. Oh well, I was 12 years old...I don't really remember. I went back and tried to play that game again recently and it seemed so incredibly dumb. FF6 holds up pretty well though.

[tabacco]

Originally Posted by mag

Oh YEAH?

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.

Notice I didn't say anything about you having opinions. Have whatever opinion you like, I don't care. IT's the difference between saying "I think Mickey Mouse is crap" and "Mickey Mouse is crap." If you can't see that, perhaps you shouldn't be complaining about our perception of your arguments.

[mag]

Originally Posted by tabacco

Notice I didn't say anything about you having opinions. Have whatever opinion you like, I don't care. IT's the difference between saying "I think Mickey Mouse is crap" and "Mickey Mouse is crap." If you can't see that, perhaps you shouldn't be complaining about our perception of your arguments.

I think it should be obvious that I'm saying what I think because I'm the one saying it. Otherwise, I think I would have to start every sentence I write with "I think." And I don't think that's a realistic expectation. I think that would start to get annoying really, really quick. I think it makes a lot more sense for people reading it to just assume that this is what I think. I think we're all smart enough to figure that out.

Anyway, that's just what I think.

mag

[Hammerite]

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

Ummm... I dunno.

Spoiler:

Didn't Tellah die in FF4? That old wizard?

Perhaps I'm wrong, but I remember being quite surprised and upset when SOMEONE died in FF4. I think it was him. Oh well, I was 12 years old...I don't really remember. I went back and tried to play that game again recently and it seemed so incredibly dumb. FF6 holds up pretty well though.

Tellah and Edward die (Palom and Porom turn themselves to stone)

[No_doubtsy]

I think we have a case of "let's hate on what is popular".

Obviously Vilain, you liked the final fantasies enough at some point to replay them and they are not short games, it's 40 hours if you don't do any of the sidequests so how long did it take you to reach Level 99? Another 80 hours? Then, Final Fantasy VII (and VIII, IX, X) became the most popular games in video games history and suddenly the characters/story are bad and the game is way too easy for an experienced RPG player like you, you're above that, right? Whatever. That's like music fans that start hating and badmouthing their favourite underground band when they go mainstream because they are "sellouts"(and that's what you said about SquareSoft), I see people like you everyday.

The fact is, all the critics and gamers in general agrees that the Final Fantasies are great games. Sure, you can find deeper stories in other mediums and the characters are a bit cliched but so what? The game is fun, epic, you really do start to care about the characters and you want to know what happens next, you can't say otherwise. 90% of games have a "good vs evil/save the world" story (KOTOR, TLJ,HL, Bloodlines) but they are still all very different so you can't blame Square for that, the important thing is what happens between the 40+ hours of gameplay and the ending, Square knows how to deliver a good video game story with a lot of twists and turns and that's what it's all about.

[hengst2404]

"The fact is, all the critics and gamers in general agrees that the Final Fantasies are great games."

I think that may be way too much of an assumption accept as a general fact or rule. FF7, I think many will agree was one of the milestones for RPG games and the genre as a whole. However, FF8 remains to many a very disappointing game. Having said that I enjoyed 9 and parts of 10, although the localozation combine with odd and sometimes disturbing voice acting made things a bit rough.

While there is certainly a force that drives many to hate the popular or be an anti-bandwagon person, there are some legitimates faults to your assertion. As a gamer who loves RPgs of all shapes and sizes, I personally have become less and less interested in the FF series for a variety of reasons. The lack of coherent stories, the way square continue to portay all its heroes in such similar manners, i.e. the androgynous girly men.

I think, at least in the US, there has come a kind of breach in the RPG genre, starting with Baldur's Gate for the PC. Now we seem American or Western depending on your definition, RPGS that feature coherent stories with established beginnings and in most cases endings. Jumping forward to KOTOR and Jade Empire we see RPGs that actually allow you to have say in the way the story is told through the use of branching paths. Not to mention that in all the games I have listed, through doing sidequests not once was I forced to enter the grind of random encounters to build experience to gain levels. All of these factors I think are the reason that more and more gamers are speaking out against the FF series. This doesn't take away from the achievements and the contributions to the genre that FF has brought at all, merely pointing out how I at least see things.

[Once A Villain]

Originally Posted by No_doubtsy

I think we have a case of "let's hate on what is popular".

Obviously Vilain, you liked the final fantasies enough at some point to replay them and they are not short games, it's 40 hours if you don't do any of the sidequests so how long did it take you to reach Level 99? Another 80 hours? Then, Final Fantasy VII (and VIII, IX, X) became the most popular games in video games history and suddenly the characters/story are bad and the game is way too easy for an experienced RPG player like you, you're above that, right? Whatever. That's like music fans that start hating and badmouthing their favourite underground band when they go mainstream because they are "sellouts"(and that's what you said about SquareSoft), I see people like you everyday.

No, I'm sorry, what changed was ME. Not the fact that the series got popular. I got older. I was 12 years old when I thought FF4 was the ultimate in storytelling. 14 years old with FF6, 17 with FF7 (and I never thought FF7 lived up to the hype, even then...I enjoyed it, but I never believed it was as good as people thought). You know what my favorite movie was when I was 16? I'm too embarrassed to say. Age changes people. Tastes mature. That's the only reason I've moved on from Square's formulaic storylines, flat characters, generic gameplay, and lack of challenge. But anyway, thanks for accusing me of things that don't apply to me...good job.

EDIT: Ah yes, I forgot to mention... Did you notice that I have been talking highly of the Dragon Quest games at the same time that I've been bashing the FF games? In Japan, they are FAR more popular than the FF games. I think DQ is still the best selling RPG series. So...popularity has nothing to do with it.

[sethsez]

Originally Posted by No_doubtsy

I think we have a case of "let's hate on what is popular".

Obviously Vilain, you liked the final fantasies enough at some point to replay them and they are not short games, it's 40 hours if you don't do any of the sidequests so how long did it take you to reach Level 99? Another 80 hours? Then, Final Fantasy VII (and VIII, IX, X) became the most popular games in video games history and suddenly the characters/story are bad and the game is way too easy for an experienced RPG player like you, you're above that, right? Whatever. That's like music fans that start hating and badmouthing their favourite underground band when they go mainstream because they are "sellouts"(and that's what you said about SquareSoft), I see people like you everyday.

The fact is, all the critics and gamers in general agrees that the Final Fantasies are great games. Sure, you can find deeper stories in other mediums and the characters are a bit cliched but so what? The game is fun, epic, you really do start to care about the characters and you want to know what happens next, you can't say otherwise. 90% of games have a "good vs evil/save the world" story (KOTOR, TLJ,HL, Bloodlines) but they are still all very different so you can't blame Square for that, the important thing is what happens between the 40+ hours of gameplay and the ending, Square knows how to deliver a good video game story with a lot of twists and turns and that's what it's all about.

I loved FFVII when I was 14. Now... not so much (though I still enjoy VI). It's a matter of changing tastes. And honestly, the gamers and critics who loved the series were rarely above 30.

And frankly, I still enjoy the games. The stories are fine for what I want out of them, but I can't stand it when people start claiming that they're some form of high art. They're not. They're cheesy anime plots full big things exploding in pretty colors while pretty people watch and angst. They're the soap operas of gaming... can be great fun, hugely popular, but you're kidding yourself if you think they have much in the way of artistic merit. They don't.

Finally, the series changed as well. What used to be relatively simple plots painted in broad strokes (FFIV) gave way to much more complex plots with greater ambitions (FFVII) and I just don't think the writing caught up. I happen to enjoy the Lunar series greatly (though Grandia does nothing for me), and I'm having a blast with Star Ocean III (published by Square-Enix, fyi) because both games understand that the writing has to match the ambition. I also think both games are far more coherant than recent FF games as well (the worlds in IV and VI felt relatively complete, but from VII on they've been too patchwork for my liking).

[CrimsonBlue]

I think they have a deep and complex story, and they tell the stories in a way that everyone can comprehend. It's a series meant to appeal to everyone, it's family entertainment done well. I guess watching Shrek, Toy Story, Ice Age etc etc are painfully insulting to your intelligence too? It's what makes most japanese games so much better than most american/european crap that's turned out - they make them entertaining to watch and play.

Instead of using three pages to describe a guy telling his woman he loves her, Squaresoft uses three words, and (currently) pretty graphics with nice music and atmosphere. That's what I like about them. I'm also not afraid to admit that I enjoy stories where I don't have to look every second word up in the dictionary.

[sethsez]

Don't like Shrek because it was almost entirely fart jokes and pop culture references that are already hopelessly dated, never saw Ice Age, loved Toy Story because it doesn't insult children's intelligence and doesn't think that the only way to appeal to adults is with lame sex jokes.

The Lunar series does the same thing Final Fantasy does (epic end-of-the-world stories mixed with romance), but it has likeable characters, clever writing, good pacing, and a coherant world. It's not as ambitious as Final Fantasy can be, but it also doesn't wind up tripping over its own feet like Final Fantasy frequently does.

[mag]

I think it's ironic how many people are responding to No_doubtsy's post with, "No, no, that doesn't describe me at all!" I think that it goes without saying that somebody who's just hating on what's popular wouldn't admit that that's the reason.

Originally Posted by hengst2404

the way square continue to portay all its heroes in such similar manners, i.e. the androgynous girly men.

I think that statement doesn't make any sense. I think most of the heroes in Final Fantasy have actually been the exact opposite of the "androgynous girly man."

Originally Posted by hengst2404

I think, at least in the US, there has come a kind of breach in the RPG genre, starting with Baldur's Gate for the PC. Now we seem American or Western depending on your definition, RPGS that feature coherent stories with established beginnings and in most cases endings.

I think you're out of your mind if you think that the story in the average American RPG is comparable to the stories in Japanese RPGs. I think that American RPGs are good, but I think that even those with the best stories are based mostly on giving the player the tools for creating his or her own story rather than creating one themselves. As a result, I think most American RPGs lack the focus on plot and characters that Japanese RPGs have.

Originally Posted by CrimsonBlue

I think they have a deep and complex story, and they tell the stories in a way that everyone can comprehend.

Crimson, I think you took the words right out of my mouth. I think Final Fantasy is the kind of game that can be enjoyed on a number of different levels.

mag

[sethsez]

Originally Posted by mag

I think it's ironic how many people are responding to No_doubtsy's post with, "No, no, that doesn't describe me at all!" I think that it goes without saying that somebody who's just hating on what's popular wouldn't admit that that's the reason.

Two of us have done this, and we both said it doesn't describe us because it doesn't describe us. I love Halo, Half-Life and Doom. I love Zelda, I love Resident Evil 4, and I love Devil May Cry. Why the hell would I care about a game's popularity? "You hate it because it's popular" is the last bastion of a failing argument, and it'd be nice to see this debate not fall to such stupid levels. I think I've given more than my fair share of reasons and explanations (and you've given reasons to back up your opinion), and I don't like having them brushed aside for "you just hate popular things."

Of course, I could just turn around and claim the same about you and Disney. It wouldn't be true, it wouldn't be fair, and it would completely disregard every reason you've given for your opinion, but hey, why not? So here it is: you just hate Disney because millions of people like them, and you have no valid reasons beyond that.

I think that statement doesn't make any sense. I think most of the heroes in Final Fantasy have actually been the exact opposite of the "androgynous girly man."

Final Fantasy VII - Cloud
Final Fantasy VIII - Squall (modeled after Gackt, an androgynous bisexual Japanese rock star)
Final Fantasy X - Tidus

I think it's pretty clear that at this point we're talking about VII-X.

[Once A Villain]

Originally Posted by sethsez

Two of us have done this, and we both said it doesn't describe us because it doesn't describe us. I love Halo, Half-Life and Doom. I love Zelda, I love Resident Evil 4, and I love Devil May Cry. Why the hell would I care about a game's popularity? "You hate it because it's popular" is the last bastion of a failing argument, and it'd be nice to see this debate not fall to such stupid levels.

Yeah, I enjoyed all of those games except for Devil May Cry. Well, Doom 3 was a little weak, but the atmosphere and visuals were tops. Anyway, my point is, I like most of those and I would call myself a big Half-Life series fan (and Valve fan, period). Popular? You bet. But I love them.

By the way seth, did you ever play System Shock 2? I drool at the idea of that game being remade in Doom 3 visuals.

[mag]

Originally Posted by sethsez

Two of us have done this, and we both said it doesn't describe us because it doesn't describe us. I love Halo, Half-Life and Doom. I love Zelda, I love Resident Evil 4, and I love Devil May Cry. Why the hell would I care about a game's popularity? "You hate it because it's popular" is the last bastion of a failing argument, and it'd be nice to see this debate not fall to such stupid levels. I think I've given more than my fair share of reasons and explanations (and you've given reasons to back up your opinion), and I don't like having them brushed aside for "you just hate popular things."

I think...ahem. Okay, that's enough of that nonsense.

The point is that responding with, "No, I'm not hating on it because it's popular. It's simply because I am wiser and more mature," is a pretty piss poor defense.

And also, someone who likes the games you mention really has no right to complain about the stories and characters in Final Fantasy.

Originally Posted by sethsez

Final Fantasy VII - Cloud
Final Fantasy VIII - Squall (modeled after Gackt, an androgynous bisexual Japanese rock star)
Final Fantasy X - Tidus

Well, for one, the phrase "androgynous girly man" itself is entirely nonsensical. One cannot be both androgynous and girly. As for the characters you mentioned, none of them are either of the two. Especially Cloud and Squall--these are two very masculine characters.

And as to your your earlier point about art:

Originally Posted by sethsez

The stories are fine for what I want out of them, but I can't stand it when people start claiming that they're some form of high art. They're not.

I think what you mean to say is that Final Fantasy isn't as pretentious as high art. "Art" is really defined as whatever the person saying it wants it to mean. So that's not much of a criticism as far as I'm concerned. It's a category that really has less to do with quality than it does with allowing the person saying it to feel superior about herself.

mag

[sethsez]

Originally Posted by mag

The point is that responding with, "No, I'm not hating on it because it's popular. It's simply because I am wiser and more mature," is a pretty piss poor defense.

He said "you can't like it then and not like it now" which isn't the case. Tastes can change.

And also, someone who likes the games you mention really has no right to complain about the stories and characters in Final Fantasy.

The games I mentioned also had piss-poor stories (well, except for Half-Life 2) and generic characters. The difference is that:

1) They're not story oriented

2) The stories they tell are more coherant than the FF games (this is the main reason why I prefer I-VI to VII-X... VI was epic yet managed to keep everything in check at all times, while VII, VIII and X flew off the rails or relied on deus ex machinas too often for my liking. IX was actually pretty good in this regard as well which is why I haven't been complaining about it).

3) Nobody has been arguing that they do have great stories. I may love Doom 3, but if someon argues that it has a great plot I'm going to come back with "uh, no, the plot sucks." I think it's pretty clear that I still enjoy the Final Fantasy games enough to have played through all of them, including X-2 which is a terrible game, but that doesn't mean I have to think the stories are great. They're entertaining in a comic book or soap opera fashion, but they're heavily flawed.

Well, for one, the phrase "androgynous girly man" itself is entirely nonsensical. One cannot be both androgynous and girly. As for the characters you mentioned, none of them are either of the two. Especially Cloud and Squall--these are two very masculine characters.

Okay then, "androgynous and girlier than average man."

Cloud I'll give you, but Squall is definitely androgynous. I mean, he's modeled after Gackt, right down to the outfit. Here's a picture:

I think what you mean to say is that Final Fantasy isn't as pretentious as high art. "Art" is really defined as whatever the person saying it wants it to mean. So that's not much of a criticism as far as I'm concerned. It's a category that really has less to do with quality than it does with allowing the person saying it to feel superior about herself.

No, I mean what I said. Final Fantasy games, especially the recent ones, have plot holes, contrivances, generic characters, etc. They're fun stories despite all of this, but I've seen people compare Final Fantasy VII to ****ing Hamlet.

[mag]

Originally Posted by sethsez

He said "you can't like it then and not like it now" which isn't the case. Tastes can change.

That's actually not what he said. What he said was, "you liked the final fantasies enough at some point to replay them and they are not short games, it's 40 hours if you don't do any of the sidequests so how long did it take you to reach Level 99? Another 80 hours? Then, Final Fantasy VII (and VIII, IX, X) became the most popular games in video games history and suddenly the characters/story are bad and the game is way too easy for an experienced RPG player like you, you're above that, right?"

Which is a fair point. If somebody starts to dislike a game at the same time that said game becomes hugely popular, I don't think it's out of line to suggest that the game's popularity may be a factor. It certainly wouldn't be the first time somebody started hating something just because it became mainstream.

Originally Posted by sethsez

The stories they tell are more coherant than the FF games

um...no.

Originally Posted by sethsez

VI was epic yet managed to keep everything in check at all times, while VII, VIII and X flew off the rails or relied on deus ex machinas too often for my liking.

Are you sure you're thinking of Final Fantasy and not some other series? Flying off the rails? Deus ex machinas? When did all of this happen?

Originally Posted by sethsez

Okay then, "androgynous and girlier than average man."

Cloud I'll give you, but Squall is definitely androgynous. I mean, he's modeled after Gackt, right down to the outfit. Here's a picture:

First of all, that's a scary picture.

And yet, Squall looks so much cooler in that outfit than Gackt does. Probably because Squall doesn't carry himself like an androgynous girly man who's posing for his photo shoot.

But forget about the costume design for a moment. Cloud and Squall are both the quintessential male personality: cool, unemotional, logical, tough, strong fighters. They even have the giant phallu...I mean, "swords." Unless you need all your men to be covered in hair and have muscles so big that they're bursting out of their clothes, I don't see how you can consider Squall to be a "girly man."

Now Kuja was definitely androgynous.

mag