Talk:Final Fantasy XII

message: The following sources should be translated and used to expand the current incomplete article:
;Final Fantasy XII Battle Ultimania
* FFXII Development Staff Interview 1 – Character Section
* FFXII Development Staff Interview 2 – Program Section
* FFXII Development Staff Interview 3 – Battle Section
;Final Fantasy XII Scenario Ultimania
* FFXII Development Staff Interview 1 – Art Section
* FFXII Development Staff Interview 2 – Movie Section
* FFXII Development Staff Interview 3 – Sound Section
* FFXII Development Staff Interview 4 – Scenario Section
* FFXII Development Staff Interview 5 – Map System Section
* FFXII Development Staff Interview 6 – Directors
;Final Fantasy XII Ultimania Omega
* Creator Interview
* Special Column
* Voice Actor Interview Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5
* Hitoshi Sakimoto Interview
* Movies Text Commentary
Anyone willing to help translate even one page is welcome! Jonathan Hardin' (talk) 15:50, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the links per WP:COPYVIO. – Allen4names 17:05, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ultimania development information 

message: It's like it was written by a super-fan, there's hardly any criticisms in this article, and this game should have a whole lot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.164.37.128 (talk • contribs) 
:What part of the article are you talking about? Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 16:06, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: To be perfectly honest, I thought the same thing. The whole article simply reeks of the "best FF ever" attitude I've seen displayed here and there on the internet. Especially on the FFXII GameFAQs message board, where they practically queue up to bash other FF games... which is weird, cause back in the old days, if you were an FF fan, you liked all the games. I guess VII changed all that. Regardless, this is a very biased article and needs to focus on more of the criticisms, such as going into better detail why some thought the soundtrack wasn't as memorable, or discussing how hard the game tries to distract you from the plot with a multitude of sidequests and excessive backtracking coupled with lengthy hikes through enemy-filled locations. The latter of which often requiring you to hold down a button to avoid battles the entire way through. Nothing wrong with wanting to boast about a game's good features and aspects, but you gonna include the blemishes, too.--Dakmordian (talk) 10:16, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, count me with Sjones23 - which parts are you having problems with? A quick look through at least the first half of the article (through Gameplay) reads as pretty bog-standard for describing what's going on, without any particular support or criticism either way of how good the game is (or isn't). umrguy42 20:57, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow, I totally forgot I'd written this or I'd have responded since my original comment (this is Dakmordian). What I think wasn't clear in my comment is that there really isn't any sign of negative criticism within the article. There's a minute comment, almost tossed in, about GameSpot regarding "back and forth" wandering around but that doesn't even begin to cover the amount of criticism I have seen people bring up; they're not hard to find, but probably not from proper sources. Even reading back through it, I still get the feeling there's a lot of bias in favor of this game. Considering the length of the article, I guess it just feels one-sided.--68.111.242.222 (talk) 08:37, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The article feels about standard for a WP video game article- a bit enthusiastic feeling (no problem there) and a reception section that glosses over the negative bits. Most vg articles are written by people who like the game, so they don't focus as much as they should on criticisms as opposed to praises. The game was well-received, but even the reviewers that gave it high scores had points that they didn't like, and the reception section right now does a poor job of expressing what they were. If anyone wants to pull in some quotes from the reviewers used in the article about what they didn't like, feel free. --PresN 00:04, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The whole page needs to be redone. There's a lot of negativity surrounding FFXII that this page doesn't address, same as the FFXIII page. Be patient, I'm working on rewriting the entire FFXII page (it's my fave FF) and including all criticisms (I know them all from being on the GameFAQs board for the game since it came out) and how the development staff have responded to them according to the Ultimania interviews. I've been too busy in the real-world since early September so haven't been on Wikipedia for 2 months. In the mean time, read the section on FFXII on the Daisuke Watanabe page. G-Zay (talk) 17:29, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who wrote this? 

message: Updated the infobox with the current formats and changed the credit fields as they did not use the currently established conventions:
*changed to order shown in the game
*scenario writers first, story writers last
*added Miwa Shoda as scenario writer, removed Jun Akiyama (not a scenario writer)
*removed producer (only people who worked on the original version are credited)
*removed programmer (field only used for notable people or single programmers with significant new concepts/technological breakthroughs in older games)
*removed some composers (only main contributors to the soundtrack are listed, Matsuo and Iwata are also both debatable, but I left them for now)
*removed Ivalice Alliance (only independent standalone articles on game series allowed in series field)
I also removed the link to Final Fantasy X-2 at the top of the article as I just don't think people have problems distinguishing the two games, hyphen plus arabic numeral and all. Prime Blue (talk) 14:10, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Infobox cleanup

message: The current table with stars doesn't appear bloated to me. Further still, it can be hidden and therefore disappear off the page. I don't see how it's bloated or page consuming when the ability to hide 95% of it is given to the reader. 
This is like Gambits in FF12 all over again; people complained that Gambits made the game "play itself" but the developers gave the ability to turn them off for all party members. Similarly, the table is not even that bloated or long; the entire thing can fit on the screen at once. Further still, if you wanna remove it from view then the ability to do so is there for the reader with the "Hide" command. I really don't see how a reversion to a table with far less information for readers is an improvement to the page. If anything, it's a downgrade. G-Zay (talk) 00:25, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Well obviously since YOU see it that way, you're obviously right, huh? Depsite the fact that it seems that everyone on this page and on WT:VG disagrees...♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 02:12, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I always edit pages thinking of the reader. The more information, the better. How is less information a good thing? The claim that there are too many reviews is also not that solid as the whole table can fit on the screen at once. It's not like the reader will have to scroll to see the whole thing. Lastly, there is a "Hide" command, so if they feel the table is in the way then they can just make it disappear. All that taken into account, the table is fine the way it is. It has lots of reviews, all from famous publications and they're all referenced. G-Zay (talk) 02:47, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm afraid there is no consensus to include so many reviews in the review table. Not only are there at least four people here who disagree with you, the accepted usage notes on Template:Video game reviews/doc explicitly direct to keep it down to 5-6 reviews which represent a wide variety of sources (region, print vs. web, platform-specific, aggregate, etc.). Axem Titanium (talk) 03:07, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I will never stop reverting the table as the table on the FFVI page is even longer and yet there are no complaints about it. If this FFXII table has to get reduced then so does the one for FFVI. If the FFVI table stays as it is then the FFXII one is worthy of staying in its current form. G-Zay (talk) 23:42, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. You can not make arguements based on other articles. Blake (Talk·Edits) 23:49, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: My point still stands. If the FFVI table can be even longer than the FFXII one and stay then the FFXII one is fine the way it is. I don't think people took the FFVI table into account when the original consensus was reached so I hope this can be redone and fair agreement reached this time. Honestly, this is just overblown. The table is fine how it is. We need to drop this and move on to more important issues. G-Zay (talk) 00:33, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, we should drop this. As in, you should stop this idiotic long-term edit war. This table is too long. So is FF6s. The solution is not to say that this one stands because that one is too long. The solution is to cut both of them, which I will now do- review tables should have 6 representative reviews or so at most, and should never contain any reviews that aren't in the text. --PresN 00:45, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

text: There are probably some ten people now who you oppose and keep reverting. Consider this your final warning. Prime Blue (talk) 00:49, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Final Fantasy 6 is now down from 3 aggregates/18 reviewers (some with several reviews per reviewer) to 2/8; I left a bit extra since there's 2 and a bit game versions included in the table. Agree with Prime Blue above- your reverting and long, slow edit warring is really getting out of hand. Keep it up and I'll block you; you've done some good work here, but for the past while you've done nothing but waste everyone's time by continually going against consensus and staying just shy of 3RR on 10 articles at once. If you don't like the consensus, get it changed, don't keep fighting on your own. --PresN 00:59, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Review table. 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Final Fantasy XII. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070822061525/http://www.gaming-age.com:80/news/2006/9/13-21 to http://www.gaming-age.com/news/2006/9/13-21
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:54, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Final Fantasy XII. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080918074657/http://www.gamepro.com:80/article/reviews/85008/final-fantasy-xii/ to http://www.gamepro.com/article/reviews/85008/final-fantasy-xii/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:08, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Final Fantasy XII. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20140102193539/http://www.1up.com/news/gdc-2007-square-enix-approach-localization to http://www.1up.com/news/gdc-2007-square-enix-approach-localization
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121019130607/http://andriasang.com/con2j5/ff_ultimate_box_game_list/ to http://andriasang.com/con2j5/ff_ultimate_box_game_list/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:49, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Final Fantasy XII. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.1up.com/news/gdc-2007-square-enix-approach-localization
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110805164730/http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=8671 to http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=8671
*Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/60eIMMWY9?url=http://www.square-enix.com/na/company/press/2006/1106_1/ to http://www.square-enix.com/na/company/press/2006/1106_1/
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://goty.gamespy.com/2006/ps2/index14.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.square-enix.com/jp/company/e/history/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:13, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: It says guests are controlled by AI, but they're controlled by gambits, which you can modify in the Zodiac versions of the game. Jeandeve (talk) 17:31, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Guest characters/gambit 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Final Fantasy XII. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070212203627/http://music.ign.com/articles/741/741502p1.html to http://music.ign.com/articles/741/741502p1.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070205230215/http://music.ign.com/articles/722/722920p1.html to http://music.ign.com/articles/722/722920p1.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070205230238/http://music.ign.com/articles/740/740816p1.html to http://music.ign.com/articles/740/740816p1.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:55, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Why do we think the "International Zodiac Job System" edition classes as "an international version" of the game? Even in the original press release, cited in the article, it says that there are no plans to release the game outside of Japan, and doesn't use the term "international version". The way I see it, they took what was already the international (i.e. North American) version of the game, and localized it for Japan, also adding the new job system. Hence the name "International Zodiac Job System". This is a bit different from calling it "an international version". Kidburla (talk) 01:24, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Because, way back in 2007, an "International Version" was an expanded, English-language version released only in Japan of a game. Hence the name "International" Zodiac Job System. SE was the biggest user of the term, but it never caught on very widely, and it's not used at all in 2018. I'm going to remove it from the article, it just causes confusion. --PresN 02:48, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe just add "marketed as an international version" instead? ~ Dissident93 (talk) 04:59, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  International version 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:52, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: I've seen this repeated elsewhere, but I can't find a usable cite; the cites currently in the article don't seem to support it.  The only remotely relevant part of the French interview merely says (via Google Translate):
*Q: Why is the hero design so effeminate?
*Akitoshi Kawazu and Hiroshi Minagawa: (Laughs) It's true that we don't really know either. What happened is that the previous game we worked on which was Vagrant Story, which was a pretty beefy hero in the prime of his life, hadn't worked at all and wasn't too popular. . So we decided to go on a teenager to see if it would interest the public more.
...so it actually says less than the other source (which says something similar); neither interview mentions Basch at all, and the French interview doesn't even indicate that the lead character was changed in development at all, though the other one does go over how he was revised.  It's easy to see how a fan who was searching for evidence to support an argument they were trying to make in that regard could interpret those as meaning that the protagonist was literally originally supposed to be Basch (since Basch fits that description), or that their attributes were split between different characters or the like, but it's not what the sources say, so using them like that here seems like it's WP:OR.  Are there any sources specifically saying this? This is the closest I could find, but even then it carefully makes clear that what it's saying is speculation ("presumably..."), and even that source doesn't even speculate that Basch was originally the main character, it just speculates that --Aquillion (talk) 06:14, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: The polygon source in refideas already confirms Basch was supposed to be the main character.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 12:41, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, that wasn't cited in the article!  I've added it and changed the wording back (with some tweaks.) --Aquillion (talk) 20:11, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Basch was initially meant to be the main protagonist of the story?