Talk:Final Fantasy/Archive 1

message: I think that a critical treatment of the universals to Final Fantasy are important.
In particular:
* A treatment of the graphics techniques utilized by Final Fantasy 1-6 (check)
* A discussion of the principle magic systems and elemental theory, including appropriate links to theories in the world. (Water, Fire, Earth, Air, Spirit)
* A discussion of the common themes of Final Fantasy: Humanism, Ecologicy, Class Warfare, Spiritualism, and links to the European Enlightenment and & Romantic Era movements, both philisophically and artistically
* Western and Eastern influence and synthesis.
* A discussion of the mystical/religious/spiritual assumptions implicit in game scenarios.
:I would also be interested in seeing a wiki treatment of the themes connecting the different Final Fantasy Universes.  --DropDeadGorgias
:Actually, I might have that theme. I am Silverlocke980, a fanfic writer from FF.Net, and it struck me one day that each Final Fantasy has a single theme. In fact, I'd argue that everything- from sidequests involving half-dead men in caves to the way the characters even act- is based on this one theme. If no one objects, I'd actually like to write these themes out.
-Silverlocke980
::I'm a bit concerned that might be orginal research. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 20:06, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: JiFish has it right. This sounds interesting and you should definitely put it on the Web somewhere, but Wikipedia is not the place for it (primarily because of WP:NOR). Not everything that's a good idea to put up simpliciter is a good idea to put into a Wikipedia article. PurplePlatypus 01:15, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I would like to see seperate articles on FF concepts, similar to the sub-articles in Ultima, such as Magic in Final Fantasy, Monsters in Final Fantasy, Mythology in Final Fantasy, Character Design of Final Fantasy, Music of Final Fantasy, etc.  
----
The topic's for each version of the series are obsolete. Since each one was only one paragraph in size with no hope of ever becoming significantly larger, I put the text of these articles into the "Final Fantacy" topic directly. All those other articles can be redirected to the main one or (in my opinion) deleted. Rlee0001 06:04 Aug 1, 2002 (PDT)
---
Pity, because I was looking to expand on each one instead of just a paragraph, (ie discuss themes in each game and whatnot).... Xknight 18:40, 14 Dec 2003 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lion's comment- 

message: Alright, people. I've decided to break down and do it because no one else will. I am going to reform and modify every single Final Fantasy article so that there is one standard. Each will have the same basic categories of discussion, along with pictures, discussions, etc. I will fix and make all redirects to make the main pages be the roman numeral of the game. This will take a while, but it has to be done. I'm hopeful of the final result. 
What I need from you guys is some Story help. I will gladly absolutely write up the entire storyline a la the [[Final Fantasy IV] article, which includes spoilers (promo-plot paragraphs don't cut it). But for controversial storyline games like Final Fantasy VII or VIII, I know I'll need some experts to help me out. Thanks guys!
Lockeownzj00 23:00, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Standardization 

message: I believe that part of the specific information about the games should be moved their main articles so this could be shortened a bit. Can somebody do it? --xDCDx 09:09, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article too long 

message: It was released first for the PS2, see this links:  . --xDCDx 23:30, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: In the United States, it was released on the PC first. --I run like a Welshman 22:10, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Final Fantasy XI release date for PS2 and PC 

message: i am just curious about the common themes for music being edited out. i just thought that its also sort of a tradition that FF did follow and pointed out some examples.  did i get some facts wrong?
:The facts were fine. The problem is that the article is already on something of the lengthy side, and certain elements (such as individual character themes) are not really so unique to the series as to be worthy of note. Music already has its own section under "overview," so I was trying to rein in the section, basically. – Seancdaug 19:01, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)
::Just another thought: there's really enough information about FF music to warrant another article devoted to it. Something like "Music in the Final Fantasy games" or such. It might be worth looking into something like that, rather than trying to make it all fit into the main article.... – Seancdaug 19:12, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)
:Cool... i guess that makes sense. here's my take... XD..... on the topic of common themes, i feel that its actually worth pointing out THE common themes and IMHO, music/art is some great part. especially its there all the time. 
:As for a section on its own. personally, i wouldn't go that far. or if so, it actually WON'T be something worth mentioning since most people wanting to know about FF music would be composers, music style, sheet music, bands played and perhaps the names of the songs. 
:Anyways, .... ok great thx for clearing that up!!  Mint greentea 08:03, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I added (I guess for the second time) a very small summary about the "themes." It's about three lines, and I believe it is an important testament to the continued power and wide popularity of the leitmotif technique, given that whenever it has been introduced into an art form, it has a very big effect on sales, at least. See the popularity (in their times) of Wagner opera tickets, Star wars movies etc. and now of course Final Fantasy games.
I believe it's a very important part of music history.
The FF Music page is still being developed, but as of now is in the very early stage, disorganized and with no info on this subject. Moreover, on the FF article in general there is nothing about music in 'overview.' I will add some later but I think that this bit of info Is important enough to stay on the main page, at least for now.
--Zaorish 21:38, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  question about common themes for music 

message: Final Fantasy Wiki is still in its early stages of development.  It does not obviate the need for external links from the main article.  The Browse Final Fantasy Wiki page only has category links. Tedius Zanarukando 10 Apr 2005 0:24 (EST).
:That's as may be, but the problem is that the links section for this article very quickly gets out of hand. Again, Wikipedia is not a web directory, and most of the additions to the external links section smack of self-promotion. As a more specialized project, Final Fantasy Wiki is more suited to that sort of detail. Rather than cluttering up this article (which is already over the "ideal" page size limit), it would be more logical to edit FF Wiki so that it can be of greater use. – Seancdaug 22:48, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)
woooo...  can i join that wiki place and become a member or something? i got like the FF artbook and music albums info to share :D (eventhough you can get that off the net but.... yayayaayyy!!)
Mint greentea 06:02, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Final Fantasy Wiki 

message: I noticed that User:205.188.117.12 had reverted most of reorganization I carried out a day or two ago, but left no explanation why. The reason for my edits, just to expand upon my edit note, were fairly simple: the distinction between subsections under the "Overview" header and distinct sections of their own was pretty much arbitrary. "Music," for instance, was a subsection of "Overview," but "Graphics" was not, which didn't strike me as making a great deal of sense. Also, "game screens" would seem to relate more directly to gameplay (since it is, after all, the primary mode of interaction with the game itself) than it does to "graphics." 
The other major change I made had to do with the links section: it would seem to make more sense to link to the Final Fantasy music article from the section about "Music" than to just throw it in at the end of the page. People looking for information regarding music in the FF series are more likely to look there than at a somewhat daunting list of links covering, well, pretty much everything under the sun. Also, the "related games" section was almost entirely redundant: there are links to the vast majority of those games elsewhere in the article, and the categorization system should handle the rest (that is why it's there, after all). Anyway, just my thoughts. Any comments? – Seancdaug 22:56, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)
:I prefer your version. I was going to revert User:205.188.117.12's changes, but didn't in the end. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 13:57, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reorganization and reversion? 

message: The article is actually looking fairly good these days, except that, well, it's pushing 40K now. I was wondering if anyone had any suggestions on how to split this up to keep page length down. I was thinking about moving the list of titles into its own article (List of Final Fantasy games, maybe?) and just linking to it from here. Any other suggestions? – Seancdaug 04:02, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)
:Yeah, I agree, plus the bottom of the article is cluttered and confusing and might be a lot more helpful if seperated from the main article. List of Final Fantasy games sounds good, but what about the other items in the Final Fantasy series.. and their references? Maybe Final Fantasy series as well as a games list? The box at the bottom is helpful enough for the main FF article, the lists could be seperate articles like you said. – Cuahl 04:49, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: What might help is if most references to the game were cut down to FF instead of Final Fantasy, especially in the character 'names section' in the 'common themes' part. Thaddius 01:43, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article too long? 

message: I think the article should be at Final Fantasy series, and Final Fantasy (video game) at Final Fantasy. --Apostrophe 19:40, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought about this too, as it is the consensus with many CVG articles. I think that most people that search for "Final Fantasy" will be looking for the series article, not the video game article. — WARPEDmirror 01:46, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Title

message: Is the :Image:Final_Fantasy_XII_JAP_Battle.jpg a good representation of the series's battle system? Not only is it for a game that hasn't been released, but I'm pretty sure Final Fantasy XII will use a different battle system than the rest of the series (Active Dimension Battle System I think).  Wouldn't an ATB or even CTB screenshot be better for the article? I think I'm going to change it to :Image:FFx-2screen2.jpg for now, but if anyone has objections, please change it back. — WARPEDmirror 01:20, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Battle system 

message: I have questions with the segment:
:Another major criticism of Square, relating to the Final Fantasy series, is the apparent lack of support for games predating Final Fantasy VII, the game that brought the franchise to its current popularity. Though all of Final Fantasy I through VI (with the exception of III) have been rereleased in one form or another, nearly all spinoffs and inspired games primarily use material from VII and onward. As such, while hardcore fans of the franchise have played most games in one form or another, most newer fans aren't even aware of Final Fantasy games predating the seventh installment.
What kind of "support" is Square supposed to provide for games; it even states that they have been rereleased on modern gaming platforms.  Also, I'm pretty sure that "newer fans" are aware of ff games before FF VII... I think the number in the title probably clues them in.  As for spinoff/inspiration material, many themes have continued from the first FF (elementals, crystals, professions, spells, etc.).  This looks like some weird form of opinion or original research.  Can the original contributor back it up or clarify it in some manner? --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 22:10, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think what they mean is that whenever Square mixes elements of Final Fantasy into other games, such as sneaking some of the characters in where they don't belong, it's almost always from Final Fantasy VII through Final Fantasy X; although they seem to skip Final Fantasy IX, or is it just me. Add to this their most recent ploy, the Compilation of Final Fantasy VII, a set of prequels and sequels to FFVII is a variety of forms; if you thought FFX-2 was bad, you ain't seen nothin' yet. IMO, all this can make some people feel that the only game Square ever produced was Final Fantasy VII, and that no other game in the series ever existed. -- VederJuda 22:53, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Although I would agree, such statements should be backed up by appropriate references. Unless such references are found, IMO this should be removed. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 00:10, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Support? 

message: I'd really like to know who's been going to nearly every FF character page and adding the asinine "Resemblances" section. I edited it out of the Tidus article ([] since I saw it to be fancruft speculation, but now I see it's in damn near every FF character page.
Does anyone else agree that these sections should go? Some of them are so reaching for a connection, it's ludicrous. You can make a connection between any two people or characters. Going by this model, this would make sense on the Michael Moore page: "Interestingly enough, Michael Moore physically resembles Will Smith minus 150 pounds, with a different style and colour of hair, different skin tone, green eyes instead of blue, and a huge gut instead of full muscle definition."
Come on. I could maybe, MAYBE see the idea behind putting in resemblances between FF characters (still asinine) but these articles are full of comparisons to friggin' Digimon characters. Obviously the designers at Square aren't looking at Digimon for inspiration, so it's obvious this is just some overeager fan with their own agenda.
With some agreement, we should edit them all out. --Marcg106 06:07, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Clearly fan cruft. Boring fan cruft at that. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 12:24, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Resemblances" should be removed 

message: I keep hearing about music from FF8 being performed in the Olympics, and even on the news, but I don't seem to see anything about it on the International Olympic Committee's website, the U.S. delegation's website; only a couple of news sources.  Being that I missed that event (yet I do want to now), I am wondering whether there is any way to get definite information on it, such as a sound/video recording of it or an official source mentioning it on a website or something like that.
There doesn't seem to be a reference to that on any Wiki page--though I hope someone corrects me.  I do want to see definite proof on this!
^_^
Cornince 06:41, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Olympics 

message: Yeah.
:Ahem, this appears to be reverse vandalism. ~ Hibana 23:09, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This user has appears to also be pushing this on the Fire Emblem page. As far as I am concerned Fire Emblem is no more of a ripoff of Final Fantasy than the Half-Life is of Doom. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 23:26, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fire Emblem ripped off from Final Fantasy 

message: I removed the following section from the article
The first Five installments of Final Fantasy featured a largely Middle Ages or Fantasy based theme world. Starting with Final Fantasy VI, the series shifted towards featuring more technologically advanced societies and put lesser focus on fantasy elements and non-human characters.
First of all, I don't think it's true. Even leaving aside Final Fantasy XI, you've got quite a number of major non-human characters in Final Fantasy X, and neither do I really accept that post-Final Fantasy VI games placed "lesser focus on fantasy elements." Final Fantasy VII and Final Fantasy X played around with reincarnation, Final Fantasy VIII featured witches, and so on. "Technology" does not preclude "fantasy" (see Star Wars for more evidence of this), and the mixture of technology and magic is by no means unique to post-Final Fantasy V games (Final Fantasy had the technologically advanced Lufeinians, Final Fantasy IV had space travel, and so on). As a historian, I've also got a bit of problem of lumping all pre-Final Fantasy VI games into a broad medievalist conception, because I'm not sure it really holds up to close scrutiny, and suggests a similarity of style between the games that I'm not convinced is there. And it's a personal pet peeve of mine to conflate fantasy (a broad genre) with Tolkein-esque, medievalist high fantasy (one of many fantasy subgenres).
More importantly, I think we need to be careful about categorizing the specific subgenres of the games. I think it strays dangerously close to original research, and even if when its possible to make a neutral, convincing claim about a particular title, that kind of detail is probably more appropriate to individual game articles. – Seancdaug 07:48, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Section removed

message: I think the section on critical acclaim is skewed towards an opinion; in my awareness VIII is consistently ranked higher than both X and especially IX (which has been given the weakest reviews of any in the series) and the reasoning seems to be flawed (X was given good reviews cos it was a smooth transition to ps2? really?). Anyone think any differently? 131.111.8.103 20:07, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I always thought that X was rated above VIII by the games media. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 16:26, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Personally, I think X is much better than VIII, and would be surprised to find that critics rate VIII better than X.  However, with the wide variety of FF games, and the fact that people like them for different reasons, I very much doubt that you can determine "critical acclaim". wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 15:12, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Critical acclaim? 

message: I think that having two FF7 pictures on the page may appear to be POV; perhaps one of them (maybe the battle system) should be replaced with an image from FF8 or FF9. Deckiller 03:29, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I have replaced the image with one from FF9. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 14:07, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV 

message: I would just like to point out that airships have not appeared in every Final Fantasy as denoted under the picture.  Just an example is Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles. Although I know that the game is not in the main series, it should be changed accordingly.--Trick man01 08:46, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No change is needed. They are listed as a major element that has appeared in more than one FF game, and they certainly are that; it doesn't say they've been in all of them. PurplePlatypus 09:47, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Airships

message: Should be in this order from left to right, two are still unmarked!! Please update ASAP!!
"Here Lies Link" 
(Having being beaten by Cloud in terms of popularity)
"Here Lies Sephiroth" 
(Having been killed again by Cloud in FF7 Advent Children)
"Here Lies Aeris" 
(Having been killed SO many times by Sephiroth, especially in the Smooth Sephiroth song)
:What? I understand what you're talking about: the gravestones in Elfheim in the Final Fantasy I&II: Dawn of Souls version of the first Final Fantasy. But...what? ~ Hibana 00:47, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Danmeister has been going around adding nonsense to talk pages, feel free to ignore him. --Pentasyllabic 01:25, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gravestones in Elfheim!! 

message: "As of late 2005, eleven games have been released in North America as part of the main (numbered) series..."
Last I checked, there were ten of the numbered games in North America.  Twelve and three aren't out here yet.  In any case, this line seems out of place in the article anyway; shouldn't it just count the number of Final Fantasy "numbered" game total?  I don't see why it's important to bring up North America at all in this case.
EDIT: Oops--Forgot to sign in... DMAJohnson 18:24, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I think this number is including the PlayStation rereleases, which would encompass all of the games except for III. However, I do see your point as to why this North American number is relevant. It should probably be removed unless someone has a good reason for it to stay.Logalot 03:43, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've already corrected it. It was my mistake. ~ Hibana 03:45, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eleven?