[QUOTE="dchan01"][QUOTE="fathoms_basic"][QUOTE="Boostd4"] Final Fantasy gets my vote. Even though VII is regarded as one of the best...I kinda saw it as the beginning of the end. I think that FF lost its "magic" when players could no longer roam freely...without the restiction of pre-rendered backgrounds. There was something so awesome about building characters up to Level 99 in FF 1-3 and just obliterating the bosses.
I guess I'm just old fashioned that way...
fathoms_basic
I'm confused... Exactly what "free roaming" were you doing in any FF before VII? And what's stopping you from leveling up to Lv. 99 and obliterating bosses in ANY FF?
While not being the original poster, I feel the EXACT same way about FF7 being a point where the FF series, and RPGs in general, took a major wrong turn. The main problem with FF7 (besides ripping off the Nei death in Phantasy Star 2) is that the difficulty of the game was ramped down to the point where a barely competant player should not die while playing the main game. The second major problem is that the majority of the game feels quite linear. (moreso than many RPGs before it) For me, RPGs are supposed to be about choice. The choice usually being "what problem do I want to tackle next?" or "where do I want to explore next?" Combat poses its own questions: "will I attempt to fight this hopeless battle with superior tactics than my foe; or will I grind to overpower him/her? When RPGs got easier and linear, mainly a trend starting with FF7, the sense of danger, exploration, and options simply diminished. Until recently, it's been hard for me to be sure that was not just being nostalgic for games of my youth. But recently I've been playing Etrian Odyssey and I am now 100% positive that the real possibility of death in combat is necessary for an RPG to be rewarding.
Now I'm REALLY confused.
First of all, the next time someone says FF VII was too "easy" and previous FFs were "harder," I'm going to have some kind of attack. There wasn't anything even remotely difficult about previous FFs. A semi-conscious monkey could've mastered systems like Espers, and the only reason it seemed "harder" was because it forced you to level grind to advance. That takes absolutely no skill or effort, and therefore, it doesn't actually contribute to the challenge. Just because you didn't have to level-grind like a madman in FF VII doesn't mean it was "easier" than previous installments in the series.
Furthermore, what's the point of saying the game felt "quite linear?" Where exactly could you go in FF VI? What choices could you make? Walk south, there's an impassable desert. Walk west, it's an impassable mountain range. Walk north, the ocean. Obviously, the only way to go is east. That's the way that entire game went. It mapped out your path exactly from start to finish. You could deviate a bit here and there, but hardly enough to say FF VI offered more in the way of "freedom" or "choice" than FF VII. That's just plain absurd.
And if you like "choice," what did you think Materia was? In every FF before VII, you were forced into a role with each and every character. This character did that, and there's nothing you can do to change it. That's what pre-existing and permanent classes do for you. In FF VII, while each character had specific strengths and weaknesses, the player could set them up any way they chose. Apply any and all skills, magic, or stat enhancements to any character you want. That's what I call "choice," and it was the very first time in the FF franchise where you actually had any choice whatsoever.
Lastly, the more "choice" you have, the less of a cohesive storyline there can be. And while that may be fine, I often call a lack of a storyline in favor of player freedom nothing more than a developer cop-out. "Bah, we don't need to write a story or create character development; we'll just let the player do whatever he wants and make his own stuff up." Yeah, that's great sometimes, but other times, I like a well-scripted story; one that must be followed in order to fully understand and appreciate it. In the end, I really don't understand your post at all. The question in the topic is, "what once-beloved series is now dead to you" and you're implying FF is dead to you because of FF VII, but you're making inaccurate comparisons between that game and previous entries in the franchise. And I mean, not just inaccurate, but completely incorrect.
Play the NES version of FFI. IT is much much harder than FFVII, which is a cakewalk. Even the supposed hard as hell final boss ISD A CAKEWALK! Sephiroth is easy. Just keep your shielding spells up and you will be fine. Fight Zeromus. There is a final boss FFVII is so overrated.Â
Furthermore, the second half of FFVI is almost certainly the most non linear thing that the FF series has ever done, save maybe the game no one likes to think abopu: FFX-2 (And even that managed to feel linear)
Â
The materia system was, essentially, a rip off of the ESPer system, and not a good one, as it did not even alllow you to learn skills. How sad is that? The moment I switch out the materia, I loose that skill. IF I spend so damn long working on it, I want some lasting benefits, not that.
Â
Want chioce? Play FFV. There's your choice. You can have a primary and secondary class for every character from a range of something like 30 classes. THAT'S choice. Want a dragoon that can heal? You can have it.
Â
There is only one game in the whole of hte FF franchise that can honestly be called well scripted, and that is Final Fantasy XII. The rest of it is competent scripting that gets the job done, but isn't exactly Stanley Kubrick quality.
Â
And to prove your wrong about having lots of choices meaning the story isn't coherent, Knights of hte Old Republic has a fantastic, non linear story where you make loads of personal choices all throughout, and it all effects both immediate and long term outcomes, but it still manages to be very coherentÂ
Log in to comment