The Shrine

Beyond the obvious "damn right" answer, I think the point made at the end that if FF7 was your first RPG and your first taste of the genre goes a VERY long way to your feelings about this game.

http://retro.ign.com/articles/958/958466p1.html

No, it wasn't. In retrospect, in my opinion, it deserves all the kudos it gets.

I will admit to not reading the article, but FFVII remains firmly spectacular in my book, up there with IV, VI, and X in the top tier of the series.

Might go read that later...

This argument will continue until we are old and rotting. Short answer: Yes. I thought it was the greatest game ever when I first played it but in hindsight it's really not.

What about the "if it was your first RPG you think of it differently" thing? I think this game is a lot like soccer: if it's all you know, it's easier to call it the "best ever" and rate it much higher. But if you're someone who was an RPG fan at the time, I've found that most of those people don't consider it as good as FF4 or FF6 (not all, most) since they had something to compare it too.

I'd put it up there with those two.

I think you're really just mad that most younger gamers think that 4 and 6 look like crap on toast and won't give them a chance as a game as a result.

In retrospect, what we should be is thankful that most of us got started back when it was okay to think that gameplay was more important than graphical polish. Because I can appreciate FF1-10, and so can you, too, probably, Zeus.

But that younger kid who won't play 6 because it's not 3D will never know exactly why Kefka was still one of the best gaming villains of all time...

I think the article is light on substance, but (surprise) Retronauts did a good episode on the topic: http://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3 ... 031308.mp3

I loved the game back when I played it, and I still like it now, but I'm able to see it's problems. Something that none of us would put up with now is how inconsistent the graphics were. Sometimes the cutscenes had detailed, normally proportioned people, other times they were pre-rendered versions of the super-deformed map models.

The article makes no effort to back up any of its points. It looks to me it's just one of those 'your favorite game sucks' articles written to generate some views on a slow news day.

And I don't know why people continue to try to make FF6/4 some kind of martyr of a game for having ghetto graphics. The fact that FF6/4 looks ghetto is not a plus. It is a minus. There's more to a RPG than just how it looks but it's not like it's especially great at the other parts. Chrono Trigger looks a lot better than either of these games and the game didn't suffer because of that. I don't really consider the SNES era FFs to be that great, and it seems to me a lot of people actually use the fact that they look ghetto as a reason why they should be better.

Replay wrote:I'd put it up there with those two.

I think you're really just mad that most younger gamers think that 4 and 6 look like crap on toast and won't give them a chance as a game as a result.

In retrospect, what we should be is thankful that most of us got started back when it was okay to think that gameplay was more important than graphical polish. Because I can appreciate FF1-10, and so can you, too, probably, Zeus.

But that younger kid who won't play 6 because it's not 3D will never know exactly why Kefka was still one of the best gaming villains of all time...

Yeah, that's part of it. The fact that many people who are either younger or a little older but didn't game until the PSX seem to dismiss anything that doesn't have a certain look to it. I saw it all the time at my store. It's kinda like not watching black and white movies or listening to Soundgarden or Green Day and thinking they're the best music in the world but can't tolerate the sound of Mozart.

I never played FF8 (due to my extreme disappointment with FF7; I had all but given up on the series after that letdown, especially with the demo and the first 8 hours of the game being so kickass) or FF10 and only part of FF5 so I can't say too much about those ones. But I will give FF7 props in that it definitely was a huge landmark game. It may have only been a slightly above-average RPG but it was very important in the history of gaming.

Don wrote:The article makes no effort to back up any of its points. It looks to me it's just one of those 'your favorite game sucks' articles written to generate some views on a slow news day.

It's an op-ed on people's views of the game. Not everything has to be purely factual based or have their opinions supported by fact.

Zeus wrote:

Don wrote:The article makes no effort to back up any of its points. It looks to me it's just one of those 'your favorite game sucks' articles written to generate some views on a slow news day.

It's an op-ed on people's views of the game. Not everything has to be purely factual based or have their opinions supported by fact.

Then the article can be summarized as follows:

Is FF7 overrated? Maybe.

Don wrote:

Zeus wrote:

Don wrote:The article makes no effort to back up any of its points. It looks to me it's just one of those 'your favorite game sucks' articles written to generate some views on a slow news day.

It's an op-ed on people's views of the game. Not everything has to be purely factual based or have their opinions supported by fact.

Then the article can be summarized as follows:

Is FF7 overrated? Maybe.

The Art of War can be summed up as follows: Know thy enemy.

Less words to summarize. The FF7 article wins.

*sarcasm alert*

Since this is all based on opinion, I guess I will throw in mine.

FFVII was a great game at the time. It was the reason I purchased a Playstation. However, when compared to other games in the FF series, and Japanese turn-based RPGs in general, I can only say that it is "notable." Its in the top tier for the genre, but I don't feel that it is in any way a defining game. In all honesty, I would personally rate this game as the fourth best in the FF series (behind I, IV, and IX; in no particular order). Of course, its just my opinion. Different fans of the series have different things they like to see.

To add some perspective to my opinion, I am 29 years old and remember playing the original FF on the NES when it came out.

I kinda liked FFVII. I played the ever loving hell out of it for a while but it wasn't amazing. Back then the RPGs that were really blowing me away were Fallout 2, Planescape Torment, and Baldur's Gate 2.

Shit, I liked Planescape Torment so much that I still think about the story and philosophy of the game on a semi-regular basis.

Zeus wrote:

Don wrote:

Zeus wrote: It's an op-ed on people's views of the game. Not everything has to be purely factual based or have their opinions supported by fact.

Then the article can be summarized as follows:

Is FF7 overrated? Maybe.

The Art of War can be summed up as follows: Know thy enemy.

Less words to summarize. The FF7 article wins.

*sarcasm alert*

Maybe you should have read that article Kupek linked to on my post on sarcasm.

What you're comparing isn't even remotely the same thing. You made up a nonsensical summary of something that has no relevance to the topic. My summary of the article was quite fair. I see no evidence for or against the question 'is FF7 overrated'. Basically you have one guy say it is and the other guy say it is not without giving any reason whatsoever. I understand you have some kind of blind hatred to FF7 but that doesn't mean you got to defend every poorly written article that ever existed just because it agrees with you.

Louis wrote:Since this is all based on opinion, I guess I will throw in mine.

FFVII was a great game at the time. It was the reason I purchased a Playstation. However, when compared to other games in the FF series, and Japanese turn-based RPGs in general, I can only say that it is "notable." Its in the top tier for the genre, but I don't feel that it is in any way a defining game. In all honesty, I would personally rate this game as the fourth best in the FF series (behind I, IV, and IX; in no particular order). Of course, its just my opinion. Different fans of the series have different things they like to see.

To add some perspective to my opinion, I am 29 years old and remember playing the original FF on the NES when it came out.

None of the FF games were ever anything really special. The series is synonymous with 'solid RPG' but never manages to get beyond that.

Don wrote:

Zeus wrote:

Don wrote: Then the article can be summarized as follows:

Is FF7 overrated? Maybe.

The Art of War can be summed up as follows: Know thy enemy.

Less words to summarize. The FF7 article wins.

*sarcasm alert*

Maybe you should have read that article Kupek linked to on my post on sarcasm.

What you're comparing isn't even remotely the same thing. You made up a nonsensical summary of something that has no relevance to the topic. My summary of the article was quite fair. I see no evidence for or against the question 'is FF7 overrated'. Basically you have one guy say it is and the other guy say it is not without giving any reason whatsoever. I understand you have some kind of blind hatred to FF7 but that doesn't mean you got to defend every poorly written article that ever existed just because it agrees with you.

I'm pretty sure I did look at it just don't remember it.

I think you missed my subtle point from before. This is an opinion-editorial piece, it doesn't have to come to a conclusion or have any sort of support whatsoever. It's only meant to spark discussion which is why I posted it to begin with.

I was never defending the article, I was just using it as a way to get a discussion going on the topic. I even pointed out the only real point of the article that I thought was relevant in any way.

Don wrote:None of the FF games were ever anything really special. The series is synonymous with 'solid RPG' but never manages to get beyond that.

Now that's an opinion the vast majority of the RPG gamers would disagree with.

And since you seem to be stuck on facts, what about FF1? Nothing special? DQ1 might have pioneered the genre on consoles and started the whole JRPG industry but it was FF1 that took it to a whole other level. Look at how much larger in scope FF1 is over DQ1. Look at how much nearly any JRPG has its gameplay based on it. You can't deny it was a landmark titles just like FF7 was.

And it certain was special enough to sustain the company and spark the genre in two separate markets (US and Japan)

Louis wrote:To add some perspective to my opinion, I am 29 years old and remember playing the original FF on the NES when it came out.

Me too. I had gotten Dragon Warrior 1 and beaten it before ever picking up Final Fantasy but FF1 really set the bar for RPGs on the consoles

X-Play actually just yesterday did a piece on this... they explain things at least a little. Not really to say the game sucked, but that it was overhyped and not as good as you'd like to remember which is pretty true. I loved it when I played it, btw.

http://g4tv.com/xplay/features/37041/Yo ... y-VII.html

Zeus wrote:

Don wrote:None of the FF games were ever anything really special. The series is synonymous with 'solid RPG' but never manages to get beyond that.

Now that's an opinion the vast majority of the RPG gamers would disagree with.

And since you seem to be stuck on facts, what about FF1? Nothing special? DQ1 might have pioneered the genre on consoles and started the whole JRPG industry but it was FF1 that took it to a whole other level. Look at how much larger in scope FF1 is over DQ1. Look at how much nearly any JRPG has its gameplay based on it. You can't deny it was a landmark titles just like FF7 was.

And it certain was special enough to sustain the company and spark the genre in two separate markets (US and Japan)

I don't care at all for a game being the first to do whatever. If FF1 was the first RPG that didn't have stick figures for graphics that doesn't mean it's special for not having stick figures for graphics. Just because stuff before it might have sucked even more, doesn't mean a game is special for not sucking.

At its core all the Final Fantasies have a gameplay that is very similar to a typical 4 command system (attack/magic/something special/item). You can call it Materia or Esper or Gambits or whatever but the core gameplay never changes. Note that just because you got 15 commands on some of the FFs, doesn't mean it's not a 4 command system. Most of the extra stuff is what the 'something special' would have been if the game system isn't stupidly bloated. Aside from FF12 all the combat system is a standard turn-based fight (the ATB version just means if you hit attack too slowly you lose some time). I consider all the FFs, with the exception of FF12, to have essentially the same kind of gameplay.

Now obviously just because gameplay is similar doesn't mean the games are exactly the same. But nothing in the FFs ever struck me as trying to elevate the RPG genre to another level. FF12 is the only game I can think of where it is vastly different, but I don't think the plusses necessarily outweight the minusses. In particular I think FF12 having you in the role of some kind of elite monster exterminator (since that's all you ever fight in the game, even bosses) in a game that is supposed to be about PEOPLE is a huge weakness to the story. FF12 is a hard game for me to judge because it does some things really well and some things very poorly, unlike other FFs which strives to be just perfectly okay in everything.

Tessian wrote:X-Play actually just yesterday did a piece on this... they explain things at least a little. Not really to say the game sucked, but that it was overhyped and not as good as you'd like to remember which is pretty true. I loved it when I played it, btw.

http://g4tv.com/xplay/features/37041/Yo ... y-VII.html

Well when you have the label of 'best RPG ever' or 'the game that made Playstation great' it is generally hard to live up to that.

I think most of the hype for FF7 actually comes after the game was out. When the game was launched we knew it was going to be big but Final Fantasy sold 3 millionish range before, so having it duplicate on the Playstation isn't exactly some kind of impossible effort. I think it's only after Playstation turned out to totally dominate the market people feel the need to pick something as the reason and FF7 become popular. If I recall FF7 sold in the 3 million range too, and there's something like 100 million PSX sold. If every person who bought a FF7 bought a PSX for the sole purpose of playing FF7, that'd put 3% of PSX's hardware base as attributed to FF7. It's certainly impressive but that was not what made PSX great.

I didn't have a playstation when FF7 came out, but Ganath did. So on Fridays after Junior High I'd go to his house and play. I managed to get to the very end of the game before my save got corrupted Partly my fault for going for Golden Chocobo, Knights of the Round, and leveling to kill the ultimate weapons.

At the time playing the game I really like it and was hooked. But in the scheme of things now I think FF6 and Chrono Trigger were far superior games and I'd replay those before going for FF7.

I find it odd that FF7 has had so much material added to the story the last few years, and it makes me realize the game was confusing as hell to me when I played it at 13 years old. Much of it probably had to do with plot holes, hell you don't see the Zach flashback unless you got back to Clouds city later in the game.

Final Fantasy 7 also marked the last time I really ever played through an RPG to completion. FF8 was not my type of game, and FF9 was decent but never got that far, same with 10 and 12. For some reason I just cannot get into RPGs anymore... or at least the FF series

Don wrote: But nothing in the FFs ever struck me as trying to elevate the RPG genre to another level.

So the whole "taking the idea of DQ to a whole new level", "is much larger in scope", and "being the basis for the entire JRPG genre" isn't considered elevate the genre?

Zeus wrote:

Don wrote: But nothing in the FFs ever struck me as trying to elevate the RPG genre to another level.

So the whole "taking the idea of DQ to a whole new level", "is much larger in scope", and "being the basis for the entire JRPG genre" isn't considered elevate the genre?

The games in NES days are so limited I hardly see any reason to be impressed about anything related to scope. First generation ghetto FMVs is 'a whole new level' compared to not having FMVs at all but it doesn't those FMVs aren't ghetto.

Zeus wrote:This is an opinion-editorial piece, it doesn't have to come to a conclusion or have any sort of support whatsoever.

If an editorial has no conclusion or no support, then it's a weak editorial.

I don't think the game is overrated. Honestly? It's all about psychology.

People don't like new FF games that much. Oh sure, they'll say otherwise, and sure, the games will sell really well...but all people really want isn't "another FFVII". People just want to recreate the same feeling of euphoria, discovery and entertainment they had when they first PLAYED FFVII.

Now, for me? I missed the hype. I played FFVI before any of the others (and barely at all), and my first Final Fantasy game was FFVIII. Now, I loved the hell out of FFVIII. It gets shit on now, for good reason, but I liked it all the same. I've played it about half a dozen times, though I only beat it once, maybe twice. But I ramble.

FFVII is in the same bucket as the original Mario or your very first orgasm or the first time you had sex or maybe just that one time, when you were a kid, and you honestly stayed up all night, waiting for Santa, only to drift off asleep at the midnight hour. It's nostalgia. Almost a swear word in today's gaming scene. It's all nostalgia.

FFVII is just part of a person's mind. It's an avatar or representation of what was, in their mind, a happier day and age. People obsess over it, people argue over it--the arguements are never ABOUT FFVII. Not really. It just happens to be the one thing that so many gamers remember--the ONE GAME that really got to people. It happened at the right time, in the right place, for the right crowd. Sort of like Star Wars.

So when people buy a new Final Fantasy game, all they are really doing is trying to buy memories. Nostalgia. They are trying to recreate whatever precious moments in their life that they associate with FFVII. And for it's benefit, it IS a great RPG. Dated, sure. But the storyline, the writing, and for the most part, even the graphics are pretty damn good. It has a big ensemble cast that manages to play well off each other (except Yuffie), and it has an engaging plot that, while slow in places, dazzles and shines in unexpected ways.

It has great boss fights and amazing music, for it's time. It's a GOOD GAME. But that's all it is. Just a good game. No matter how much anyone tries, no matter how many games they play, they will never have what they had with Final Fantasy VII again. Hell, with time and memory being what they are, maybe they never even had those moments to begin with.

What people need to do now is give it up. Let go of your nostalgia, let go of your past. Get over Final Fantasy VII. Get over it! There are so many more games out there to play. Instead of whining about FFIX's ersatz cast, focus more on its soundtrack, which is superior to VII's in every god-damned way (more variety, better sound quality, more experimental tracks, and far, far, far more memorable songs. Black Mage Village is a great example). Or focus on it's amazing graphics. For a PSX game, it looks hell of a lot better than a lot of early PS2 games.

There's a whole world of games out there, and as the future comes and goes, gaming will only get better. Instead of clinging to the past like an old security blanket, why not take time to enjoy the present? Why not take time to relish the future?

Get over FFVII.

And just stop...talking about it. It's a conversation that we've all already had, many, many times.

I missed the hype train for FF7. I just saw a game which had a great beginning, and the rest of the game was forgetable with a few small exceptions. I see it more like the prototype to FF8; which I liked a lot more. I can agree with a remake though, it worked wonders for FF4 (another game I didn't particularilly like on its first release.

Kupek wrote:

Zeus wrote:This is an opinion-editorial piece, it doesn't have to come to a conclusion or have any sort of support whatsoever.

If an editorial has no conclusion or no support, then it's a weak editorial.

Not really. Sometimes they're just there to bring up a point or spark discussion rather than being a method of portraying a singular opinion to the reader.

Don wrote:

Zeus wrote:

Don wrote: But nothing in the FFs ever struck me as trying to elevate the RPG genre to another level.

So the whole "taking the idea of DQ to a whole new level", "is much larger in scope", and "being the basis for the entire JRPG genre" isn't considered elevate the genre?

The games in NES days are so limited I hardly see any reason to be impressed about anything related to scope. First generation ghetto FMVs is 'a whole new level' compared to not having FMVs at all but it doesn't those FMVs aren't ghetto.

There is such thing as a landmark game. So yes, compared to what we see today or even movies of the time, it's very limited. Just like Tetris seems like a pretty limited puzzle game nowadays. But at the time, there was nothing like FF1. DQ had introduced the console world to turn-based battle with a story and exploration of an island. It felt like a pen and paper RPG with nice graphics (and HARD back then). FF1 introduced a much larger, much more active world, flying, a longer, more flushed out storyline, being able to see yourself in battle, and many of the RPG conventions you take for granted now.

And Dragon's Lair was not ghetto. It's still OK looking even now. That was the game that put FMV on the gaming landscape. Everybody just played catch-up until the PSX (except for some PC stuff).

Seeker's List wrote:I missed the hype train for FF7. I just saw a game which had a great beginning, and the rest of the game was forgetable with a few small exceptions. I see it more like the prototype to FF8; which I liked a lot more. I can agree with a remake though, it worked wonders for FF4 (another game I didn't particularilly like on its first release.

For once, we agree. FF7 had an AWESOME first 8 hours. I loved it so much up to that point. Then after you left Midgar, it went completely off the rails. It's almost like the developers were overwhelmed by the scope of what they were trying to accomplish.

Do we have this discussion every year?

Oh hey, 4000.

Blotus wrote:Do we have this discussion every year?

Oh hey, 4000.

I actually like bringing up RPGs from the golden age (well, the age of Final Fantasy 6 to Skies of Arcadia; I just like refering to that as the Golden age =P).

Oh, and somehow I passed 10,000. I guess I post here a lot =P

If anyone actually remembers, I actually jiggered the Shrine around back when FFVII came out explicitly to celebrate the release, even putting up the overworld theme back as the page music, back when the site had page music.

So I should probably consider myself biased and stay out of the discussion.

By the way, the absolute worst thing about FFVII was that they hadn't come up with the idea that you ought to be able to skip a three-minute summon somehow.

Man, I still remember the first time I fought Sephiroth. I must have summoned Bahamut like twenty times, then I slipped a button press and watched in horror as Cloud threw up a Megalixir and the word "Recovery" appeared under Sephy's model. (For those who don't remember, Elixirs and Megalixirs explicitly avoided the "9999" limit that was part of the rest of the game and indicated it with that phrase.) I screamed, turned off my PS1 and fell asleep sulking and furious. Funny memory in retrospect.

I mean, KoTR was fun the first or even fifth time you saw it, but after that...whoo.

I remember when Sephiroth would cast Supernova and it would take forever and a day. I remember putting the controller down, going up stairs, pouring myself a cup of milk with a couple of cookies, then coming back downstairs and it hadn't finished casting. Because of ridiculousness like that, I spent a good hour and a half beating him

One time I had one of my guy used a Megaelixir but he got confused (Supernova confuses you) and used it on Sephiroth instead.

The trick with most FFs since about 5 is to never bother with any of the summons because they don't do good damage and take way too long to animate. Of course it's kind of odd since summons are supposed to be the showcase effects of the series, but you really don't want to use them if at all possible.