This game not good

I don't like it. Except 3 things.

1: In 3D version Refia doesn't want to be a toad
2: Xande's ONLY words are " You have done well to come this far but the darkness is 3 steps ahead of you! Perish! "
3: The Pixel Remaster version is alright. The only good version IMO.

PR > NES > Steam > DS that is how I rank the versions of this game, I assume PSP is the same as Steam and NOT DS ( they are mostly the same except the dumbass wifi trout for the bonus stuff)

Conclusion: Play FF2 instead. Or Pixel Remaster. Or FF5 cos FF5 is FF3 but good.

I have a real soft spot for FFIII. It's easily my favorite of the NES era FFs because it feels the most imaginative and has the stronger gameplay of the three. I agree that the 3D remake is the weakest version, but I can't comment on the PR version yet. Still, I like how unapologetically fantasy and positive it is. I'm also not going to turn down a job class system unless it's really wrecked and I feel FFIII's is pretty good for what it is. It's also just interesting to me to see where the mechanics and themes of the series come from. I get that it's late arrival in the west has forever tarnished it's reputation here, but from a historical perspective, it's debatably the most important entry in terms of defining what Final Fantasy is.

Attachment 77808

I do think it has some nice thing's to it that aren't version exclusive. It's structure I'm not too fan of, Fynn calls it " fairy tale like". The whole going to a place solving a small issue then going somewhere else unrelated and repeating that is something i'm not a fan of, I prefer a more connected story I guess. 'course I am lighter on the game since it is an olden day FF, I think FF2 is better in nearly every way but i think FF3 has quite a few things over FF1, the ending of the game being the only real let down.

But still, the fact that one version of the game can turn it from a dislike to an ok is something, means there is good in FF3's design as a whole.

I'm likely used to FFIII's progression structure because that is all of DQ's structure. My issue with FFII is that it's a bit too heavy on plot coupons. It's like all the big stuff is interspersed with long tedious side quests to find an item needed to get to the next big story hook and most of the time I feel it's poorly justified. The game just always feels padded to me.

That's fair honestly. FF2 isn't gonna win any awards for its story that's for sure. I just liked how it's more story emphasis than the other 2 and it's a bit of a darker tone which I admit, I am a sucker for dark tones. Almost all of my favourite games of series are games with dark tones or atmospheres xD. Also i just really appreciate its unique leveling system, I hope one day we get a remix of the system that improves upon it with modern day knowledge.

As for FF3, I actually haven't played much DQ at all, so I could understand if your a fan that something reminding you of it is a bonus lol.

Maybe I'm just a dumbass but I couldn't figure out how the job system worked. What was the benefit in levelling up jobs? Could you switch abilities between jobs like FFV?

(Keep in mind that I didn't get very far, heh.)

I believe leveling the jobs made you stronger with them, but no you could not switch abilities between jobs at all.

Galuf is correct, it simply raised your proficiency with the job making the character better with the class. It has a further purpose in the 3D remake as their is a blacksmith character added into the game who will forge a class specific item if you max out their Job Level. Likwise, in the 3D versions, the Thief Steal ability is tied to their class level with the rarest items only being accessible if they are sufficiently high level (like 70+) so you can get a steady supply of Phoenix Downs and the Gungnir spear from Odin.

Ok, good to know! Maybe I should give it another go.

It's actually the best NES release!