FFIX fails to get back to the series' roots

Note: This is not intended as a troll. While I don't care much for FFIX, I am interested in other gamers' thoughts about this.

FF9 has often been touted as "getting back to the series' roots". I've played FF since FF1 on the NES, but for me this game just didn't capture the feel of FF1-6 at all. I'm not sure exactly what it is, but I mostly attribute it to two related problems: an excessively cartoony graphical style, and a plot with far too many "lighthearted" and generally not serious elements in it.

FF9's graphics are distinctly cartoony, while FF1-6's generally were not (granted they each had their own individual style) except for the SD character and townspeople sprites. FF6, for example, had excellent and mostly quite serious monster art that still holds its own today. The same goes for the dungeon and town art. Compare these with FF9's and the difference is immediate. FF9 used a cartoonish style for the dungeons, towns, FMV, and character portraits (again, compare these to those from FF2, 4, and 6). Alexandria reminds me of something from "The Wizard of Oz", not FF1-6, and Brahne's ridiculous design has no precedent anywhere else in the series (compare her to the other "initial villains", such Garland, Golbez, or Gestahl (sp) for example) . Even FF1 often seems more serious, with any cartooniness coming more from a limited art budget and NES graphical limitations than anything else.

FF9's plot and characters also have a non-serious tone about them that, again, was totally new for the series up to that point, with the partial exception of FF5. I'm aware that there are some very serious moments in the game, especially towards the end, but the the whole setup with Queen Brahne (complete with totally absurd appearance) and her army of pointy-hatted, yellow eyed black mages seems like it belongs in a Disney movie. Steiner and Quina's character development and designs are also out of place for the series. Quina is the only overt joke character I can think of, and Steiner's "bumbling prejudiced fool" personality becomes tiring and annoying, and it also turns him into a borderline joke character.

I'll probably get flamed for this, but all in all the game ends up feeling more like "Final Fantasy Mystic Quest done right" than anything that recaptures the feel of FF1-6. It's ironic that FF12, a game that's a radical departure in many ways, actually succeeds more in capturing the "epic sweep" of the earlier games than FF9.

Thoughts?

Yep.

i liked ff9 purly for that. its all part of the fun to have a little comedy plus the cartoony feel difines the game. Everyone has their favorates, mine is VII(which had a cartoony feel as well) but it still works as does IX

I absolutely LOVED that game!

For me it was the cartoonish style and beautifull soundtrack
that really made me be "in" the game. It was my first
FF/RPG though alot of my judgement may depend on
that. I never really had a problem with the "lacking"
story (I was like 10 at the moment I played it) in fact
it had the best storyline I had ever seen. That plus
the fact that I wanted to buy dbz: budokai but a
salesman persuaded me in buying FF IX instead so
I had no expectations for it, really made the game
my best gaming experience ever.

Quote:

---

FF9 has often been touted as "getting back to the series' roots". I've played FF since FF1 on the NES, but for me this game just didn't capture the feel of FF1-6 at all. I'm not sure exactly what it is, but I mostly attribute it to two related problems: an excessively cartoony graphical style, and a plot with far too many "lighthearted" and generally not serious elements in it.

---

What is so wrong with some lightheartedness in a storyline? The entire story does not need to be gloomy and dark all the time. Not that there wasn't a fair share of that in this game's story anyway.

Quote:

---

FF9's graphics are distinctly cartoony, while FF1-6's generally were not (granted they each had their own individual style) except for the SD character and townspeople sprites. FF6, for example, had excellent and mostly quite serious monster art that still holds its own today. The same goes for the dungeon and town art. Compare these with FF9's and the difference is immediate. FF9 used a cartoonish style for the dungeons, towns, FMV, and character portraits (again, compare these to those from FF2, 4, and 6). Alexandria reminds me of something from "The Wizard of Oz", not FF1-6, and Brahne's ridiculous design has no precedent anywhere else in the series (compare her to the other "initial villains", such Garland, Golbez, or Gestahl (sp) for example) . Even FF1 often seems more serious, with any cartooniness coming more from a limited art budget and NES graphical limitations than anything else.

---

I do not see what is so wrong about a 'cartoony' art style. FFI, II, III, IV, V, and VII all had super-deformed characters. FFVIII was the only game up until that point that even used realistically scaled characters.

Quote:

---

FF9's plot and characters also have a non-serious tone about them that, again, was totally new for the series up to that point, with the partial exception of FF5. I'm aware that there are some very serious moments in the game, especially towards the end, but the the whole setup with Queen Brahne (complete with totally absurd appearance) and her army of pointy-hatted, yellow eyed black mages seems like it belongs in a Disney movie. Steiner and Quina's character development and designs are also out of place for the series. Quina is the only overt joke character I can think of, and Steiner's "bumbling prejudiced fool" personality becomes tiring and annoying, and it also turns him into a borderline joke character.

---

There was enough seriousness mixed in with silliness throughout the entire story.

Anyway, it seems to me that your only complaint is that this game wasn't serious enough for you (when there really was just as much or more seriousness as any of the other games in the series), or that you don't like a 'cartoony' art style (which is just silly, the only game with realistically scaled characters up until then was FFVIII), which are rather superficial complaints to me. The reason FFIX is often regarded as 'going back to the series's roots' is because as well as returning to a more fairy-tale like world atmosphere, it also brought back many midieval elements that weren't in FFVI, VII, or VIII (the three games that pushed the series into a much more technological world atmosphere). There are also more references to past games in the series than any other game in the series that I can think of.

He's not saying cartoony style is bad, he's saying it doesn't make it get more "back to the series' roots".

I agree... It definitely lacks the "epic" feel of previous final fantasies... And about the cartoony thing, this game does take time to get used to it because of the lack of humans.. Most FFs since 1 had mostly humans with the occasional whatever-race character thrown in (such as Red XIII in 7) so at first I hated most characters :P they all looked stupid and silly to me... And dont even get me started on how Quina, a clumsy frog-eater is the most powerful character in the game...

Again, in my opinion, FF V succeeded much better at the whole humorous plot thing, specially because of Gilgamesh :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mirage

He's not saying cartoony style is bad, he's saying it doesn't make it get more "back to the series' roots".

---

Exactly.
I also addressed the point about FF 1 -6 having super deformed characters in my original post.

FFV had just a cartoonish style (compare to FFIV), and even more comedy thrown in than FFIX, in my opinion. Just about every locale had either Bartz or Galuf doing something stupidly funny.

Quote:

---

FF9 has often been touted as "getting back to the series' roots". I've played FF since FF1 on the NES, but for me this game just didn't capture the feel of FF1-6 at all. I'm not sure exactly what it is, but I mostly attribute it to two related problems: an excessively cartoony graphical style, and a plot with far too many "lighthearted" and generally not serious elements in it.

---

You're disappointed because it's not just one big amalgam of previous games? Sorry, but not even those games as standalones represent everything the series has to offer. FFIX is supposed to be eclectic, cherry-picking the best from previous games. I wouldn't say the artistic stylings are 'excessively cartoony' either -- it's a shakeup from the overly-humanistic FF7/8 worlds where many FF games had most of the 'fantastical' elements squeezed out of 'em and replaced with a bit o' magic, a summon, etc. FFIX goes the whole nine yards in delivering the 'fantasy' that the series namesake touts, and I for one am very glad they did. 'Course, if you're not even sure why you don't like it, that's that.

Quote:

---

FF9's graphics are distinctly cartoony, while FF1-6's generally were not (granted they each had their own individual style) except for the SD character and townspeople sprites. FF6, for example, had excellent and mostly quite serious monster art that still holds its own today. The same goes for the dungeon and town art. Compare these with FF9's and the difference is immediate. FF9 used a cartoonish style for the dungeons, towns, FMV, and character portraits (again, compare these to those from FF2, 4, and 6). Alexandria reminds me of something from "The Wizard of Oz", not FF1-6, and Brahne's ridiculous design has no precedent anywhere else in the series (compare her to the other "initial villains", such Garland, Golbez, or Gestahl (sp) for example) . Even FF1 often seems more serious, with any cartooniness coming more from a limited art budget and NES graphical limitations than anything else.

---

You're comparing games with low GFX capabilities to a modern-age game -- naturally there is going to be disparaties. I wish I could compare Brahne to previous baddies, but then I think, "Gestahl was five pixels wide and Brahne has CGI sequences built around her."

Quote:

---

FF9's plot and characters also have a non-serious tone about them that, again, was totally new for the series up to that point, with the partial exception of FF5. I'm aware that there are some very serious moments in the game, especially towards the end, but the the whole setup with Queen Brahne (complete with totally absurd appearance) and her army of pointy-hatted, yellow eyed black mages seems like it belongs in a Disney movie. Steiner and Quina's character development and designs are also out of place for the series. Quina is the only overt joke character I can think of, and Steiner's "bumbling prejudiced fool" personality becomes tiring and annoying, and it also turns him into a borderline joke character.

---

See, it's stuff like this that doesn't make sense to me. Steiner is portrayed as an Alexandrian zealot, overly protective, has a strong sense of duty, doesn't want to be involved in wrongdoings, etcetera...and then he gets a complete one-eighty later on, choosing to rely on Zidane, the thief who abducted his princess. He even goes so far as to say something like "I haven't decided if you're the right man for the princess!" Naturally three discs' worth of development can't be summarized in one post, but there's no sudden OOC change that occurs -- he's pretty well-rounded when it comes down to it. Quina, on the other hand, isn't supposed to be anyone's foil and is, in essence, single-minded (like whoa).

Just as you say that things are "Disney"-like, I have to wonder: there's nothing wrong with the animation, the black mages aren't shown as happy-go-lucky things that want to play in flowerbeds, Brahne's never portrayed in an overtly comical moment. Since dialogue really pushes the game forward, and that can definitely be less-than-serious, I think that might be part of the problem. 'Course, I don't watch anything Disney so I'm not really up to speed on that sort of thing (KH is foreign, yeah), but the game has a distinctly dark tone for quite awhile -- a fat elephant-lady and some mages that are shown in that respect doesn't equate to Disneyesque things, to me.

Quote:

---

I'll probably get flamed for this, but all in all the game ends up feeling more like "Final Fantasy Mystic Quest done right" than anything that recaptures the feel of FF1-6. It's ironic that FF12, a game that's a radical departure in many ways, actually succeeds more in capturing the "epic sweep" of the earlier games than FF9.

---

FFXII has a more world-centric point of view than character-centric, so while you could say that the "sweep" was done better, I'd have to say that FFIX didn't attempt to be epic. It takes four discs, yeah, but it doesn't have that air of trying to be something it's not, overexerting itself and falling drastically short. I played XII, wrote a guide for it, debated plot points...I wouldn't call that game better than anything. Characters are just 'vessels' for the player to live through; FFXII is very, very hollow in that respect, using video sequences to advance the story as opposed to intrapersonal dialogue. Funny how people perceive radical changes, huh?

Naturally, yer entitled to whatever you want to think. At least you didn't say you hate the game because the main character has a tail.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shotgunnova

You're disappointed because it's not just one big amalgam of previous games? Sorry, but not even those games as standalones represent everything the series has to offer. FFIX is supposed to be eclectic, cherry-picking the best from previous games. I wouldn't say the artistic stylings are 'excessively cartoony' either -- it's a shakeup from the overly-humanistic FF7/8 worlds where many FF games had most of the 'fantastical' elements squeezed out of 'em and replaced with a bit o' magic, a summon, etc. FFIX goes the whole nine yards in delivering the 'fantasy' that the series namesake touts, and I for one am very glad they did. 'Course, if you're not even sure why you don't like it, that's that.

---

The game disappointed me on several levels, and I'm quite clear on why that is, but that's not the point. Perhaps I worded my original post badly, but I'm just trying to argue that this game does not capture the look and feel of FF1-6. I'm not trying to debate its merits. The cartooniness is excessive relative to that of FF1-6. If this game were called "FF:MQ 2", then its visual style would not be out of place.
When I walk around Alexandria, I'm half expecting to see Mickey Mouse in a wizard's robe, or the Cowardly Lion. Not so when I'm wandering around Narshe or Doma.

Quote:

---

You're comparing games with low GFX capabilities to a modern-age game -- naturally there is going to be disparaties. I wish I could compare Brahne to previous baddies, but then I think, "Gestahl was five pixels wide and Brahne has CGI sequences built around her."

---

That's true, but at least you can compare Brahne's appearance to Amano's paintings of Gehstal. There's also enough detail on Garland in combat, and certainly Golbez, to see that the look the artists were aiming for wasn't anything as absurd as Brahne.

Quote:

---

See, it's stuff like this that doesn't make sense to me. Steiner is portrayed as an Alexandrian zealot, overly protective, has a strong sense of duty, doesn't want to be involved in wrongdoings, etcetera...and then he gets a complete one-eighty later on, choosing to rely on Zidane, the thief who abducted his princess. He even goes so far as to say something like "I haven't decided if you're the right man for the princess!" Naturally three discs' worth of development can't be summarized in one post, but there's no sudden OOC change that occurs -- he's pretty well-rounded when it comes down to it. Quina, on the other hand, isn't supposed to be anyone's foil and is, in essence, single-minded (like whoa).
Just as you say that things are "Disney"-like, I have to wonder: there's nothing wrong with the animation, the black mages aren't shown as happy-go-lucky things that want to play in flowerbeds, Brahne's never portrayed in an overtly comical moment. Since dialogue really pushes the game forward, and that can definitely be less-than-serious, I think that might be part of the problem. 'Course, I don't watch anything Disney so I'm not really up to speed on that sort of thing (KH is foreign, yeah), but the game has a distinctly dark tone for quite awhile -- a fat elephant-lady and some mages that are shown in that respect doesn't equate to Disneyesque things, to me.

---

Again, I'm not interested in debating the merits of these characters. I'm just saying that there's nothing like them in the rest of the series. There are other humorous characters like Ultros and Porom, but none are taken to the ridiculous extreme of Quina. Likewise most FFs have stereotyped and cliched characters, but nothing as obnoxious and overdone as Steiner. The fact that he develops doesn't change his extremely stereotyped and borderline joke personality.

Disney movies have villains and dark elements too. "Elephant-lady" isn't out of place in a Disney movie at all - she even reminds be a little bit of the villain in "The Little Mermaid":
http://www.imdb.com/gallery/ss/00977...tml?hint=group
It's just that the scale and nature of the threat is of a different kind than that of older FFs. The black mages just look unthreatening and weird once they are made into full-blown polygonal models. Compare a hoard of those things popping out of boxes with Baron's armies marching into Fabul.

Quote:

---

FFXII has a more world-centric point of view than character-centric, so while you could say that the "sweep" was done better, I'd have to say that FFIX didn't attempt to be epic. It takes four discs, yeah, but it doesn't have that air of trying to be something it's not, overexerting itself and falling drastically short. I played XII, wrote a guide for it, debated plot points...I wouldn't call that game better than anything. Characters are just 'vessels' for the player to live through; FFXII is very, very hollow in that respect, using video sequences to advance the story as opposed to intrapersonal dialogue. Funny how people perceive radical changes, huh?

Naturally, yer entitled to whatever you want to think. At least you didn't say you hate the game because the main character has a tail.

---

Well most of the older games seemed like they tried to be epic, so if FF9 was not, then you're just conceding my point.

Well the in-game designs were done in order to allude to a 2d in 3d design. I don't personally find them "cartoony" nor did I find the enviroments to be the same.

As for Brahne, I don't feel that comparing her to Golbez is right. She may start off the whole war nonsense but her role is pretty minor compared to the likes of Garland and Kuja within the storyline. As for designs, must I remind you of Borgen from FFII? He does not exactly come off as sinister or serious villain material when one looks at his designs.

The story is pretty dark actually, I think the lighthearted elements were placed in there to counter it. The plot and the way it explores it's theme of "The Meaning of Life" makes it one of the darkest games within the main series. I don't feel the characters are anymore cliche than previous installments and I feel they only help to tell the more serious parts of the story better.

The previous games always had light hearted moments thrown in to counter their rather dark stories. Only FFI and FFII are mostly serious but that is probably due to them being early installments in a genre that was just starting to grow within the video game media. FFVIII was also pretty damn serious as well with only a few humorous moments spread thinly through the game.

Overall, FFIX brought back good characters, better world design and a more interesting villain than what we got from FFVII and FFVIII. But that's just my opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neo-Omega Mk XXV

Note:

FF9 used a cartoonish style for the dungeons, towns, FMV, and character portraits (again, compare these to those from FF2, 4, and 6).

Thoughts?

---

Burmecia was creepier then most of the towns in FF's. also treno a town with eternal night is a town of the rich and a town of thieves. as for the dungeons they all seemed rather creepy in FFIX which ones are you talking about that were "cartoony"? as for the FMV's half of them are of towns being destroyed whats so cartoony about that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frostwake

I agree... It definitely lacks the "epic" feel of previous final fantasies... And about the cartoony thing, this game does take time to get used to it because of the lack of humans.. Most FFs since 1 had mostly humans with the occasional whatever-race character thrown in (such as Red XIII in 7) so at first I hated most characters :P they all looked stupid and silly to me... And dont even get me started on how Quina, a clumsy frog-eater is the most powerful character in the game...

---

how does this game lack an epic feel? you travel the world to unexplored continents. you go to another planet you watch town after town be attacked and destroyed. Or if not destroyed sevearly leveled in some areas. you even are attacked by the waltz in the airship and at one point they have to plow through a ton of flying dragons. you go to memoria which is idk some kinda other dimension where memories are forged. what isn't epic about this game?

as for races all FF's have a variety of races.

as for the characters sure they all seemed a little bit carefree but then again they were all pretty young and thats how they should be. besides freya and armarant were serious enough for the rest. steiner was serious too but kinda a clutz. FFIX had a good cast of characters. but i wont get into it becase that would end up makeing this post massive.

it seems that everyones real complaint was that it had some light hearted characters instead of typical emo's. or the graphics were either not as good as FFX or not as crappy as FFI.

as for FFIX going back to the basics it was they scrapped the idea of incredible technology. brought back crystals and there importance in the game. not as important as some FFs but come on were crystals even mentioned in FFVIII or FFVI? materia were basically crystals in my book so FFVII is ok when it comes to the crystals. also i thought it was about time we had a character who had a dragoon class. also unlike FFVII and FFVIII everyone had a unique set of abilitys besides there limits/overdrive/trance/whatever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno

Well the in-game designs were done in order to allude to a 2d in 3d design. I don't personally find them "cartoony" nor did I find the enviroments to be the same.

---

Perhaps the graphics weren't massively more cartoony than those in FF1-6, but trying to mimic the visuals of those games with pre-rendered backgrounds and low polygon count models somehow looks "wrong" . But have a look at
http://www.warmech.net/special/bosses/bosses.html
and compare the boss art from each game. What I have in mind is stuff like the Shell Dragon, Catoblepas and the Tantarian in FF9,
or http://www.rpgamer.com/games/ff/ff9/...enemies_04.jpg.
As for the environment, two examples are:
http://www.rpgamer.com/games/ff/ff9/screens/ff9_112.jpg
and
http://www.rpgamer.com/games/ff/ff9/screens/ffix_34.jpg
If those don't look cartoony to you, then we must just have different conceptions of "cartoony".

Quote:

---

As for Brahne, I don't feel that comparing her to Golbez is right. She may start off the whole war nonsense but her role is pretty minor compared to the likes of Garland and Kuja within the storyline. As for designs, must I remind you of Borgen from FFII? He does not exactly come off as sinister or serious villain material when one looks at his designs.

---

But she's presented as the main villain at the beginning of the game, and later we learn that she isn't. Golbez is the same, but he's got a bigger role in FF4's story than Brahne has in FF9. Garland is ... both the main villain and not the main villain at the same time :D (and there really isn't much of a story in FF1).
Borgen looks a bit silly, but he's certainly not very important in FF2's story from what I remember (less important than Brahne in FF9).
I know that all of the games have some designs that aren't serious (PuPu in FF8 for example, Ultros/Orthros in FF6, the Magus Sisters in FF4), they just didn't give me the same impression that FF9 did. Actually FF2's art style might be the least serious out of FF1-6.

Quote:

---

The story is pretty dark actually, I think the lighthearted elements were placed in there to counter it. The plot and the way it explores it's theme of "The Meaning of Life" makes it one of the darkest games within the main series. I don't feel the characters are anymore cliche than previous installments and I feel they only help to tell the more serious parts of the story better.

---

I certainly don't think that game is the darkest in the series by far (I'd go with FF6 and 7), but keep in mind that atmosphere is produced by many different things, including visual style, music, and characters. I didn't say all of the characters are more cliche than previous installments (but I think they are more stereotypical and uninteresting than those in FF7 and 8), just that no other characters were so totally stereotypical and overdone as Steiner.

Quote:

---

The previous games always had light hearted moments thrown in to counter their rather dark stories. Only FFI and FFII are mostly serious but that is probably due to them being early installments in a genre that was just starting to grow within the video game media. FFVIII was also pretty damn serious as well with only a few humorous moments spread thinly through the game.

---

I'd say only FF5 even comes close to not being "mostly serious", unless you just mean that only FF1 and FF2 don't have any lighthearted moments, which might be true.

Quote:

---

Overall, FFIX brought back good characters, better world design and a more interesting villain than what we got from FFVII and FFVIII. But that's just my opinion.

---

I disagree sharply with this last sentence that's basically the opposite of how I feel. FF9 has the worst world design in the series (except for the mist continent, which is just decent), a disappointing villain who is not in the league of Sephiroth (himself arguably overrated, but villains haven't generally been a strong point of the FF series), and uninteresting characters except for Vivi. This isn't the place for another debate about this though :p.

WARNING MASSIVE SPOILERS FOR FFIX!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neo-Omega Mk XXV

Perhaps the graphics weren't massively more cartoony than those in FF1-6, but trying to mimic the visuals of those games with pre-rendered backgrounds and low polygon count models somehow looks "wrong" . But have a look at
http://www.warmech.net/special/bosses/bosses.html
and compare the boss art from each game. What I have in mind is stuff like the Shell Dragon, Catoblepas and the Tantarian in FF9,
or http://www.rpgamer.com/games/ff/ff9/...enemies_04.jpg.
As for the environment, two examples are:
http://www.rpgamer.com/games/ff/ff9/screens/ff9_112.jpg
and
http://www.rpgamer.com/games/ff/ff9/screens/ffix_34.jpg
If those don't look cartoony to you, then we must just have different conceptions of "cartoony".

---

The envirements look normal to me and as for the enemies the only ones that look remotely cartoony are the knights that fight Steiner's side. I think we have a different conception of "cartoony" I'm afraid.

Quote:

---

But she's presented as the main villain at the beginning of the game, and later we learn that she isn't. Golbez is the same, but he's got a bigger role in FF4's story than Brahne has in FF9. Garland is ... both the main villain and not the main villain at the same time :D (and there really isn't much of a story in FF1).

---

Brahne is more like President ShinRa when you think about it. Sorta've comes in and creates the basis of what the threat is and then dies only to reveal the true evil. She's not nearly as involved as Golbez was with the events in the story. Hell it becomes pretty damn obvious that Kuja is just using her as a pawn so it's difficult to think of her as "main villain" material.

As for Garland, he's basically the source of the whole mess in each respective FF he shows up in. ;)

Quote:

---

I certainly don't think that game is the darkest in the series by far (I'd go with FF6 and 7), but keep in mind that atmosphere is produced by many different things, including visual style, music, and characters. I didn't say all of the characters are more cliche than previous installments (but I think they are more stereotypical and uninteresting than those in FF7 and 8), just that no other characters were so totally stereotypical and overdone as Steiner.

---

I'll give you the fact that FFIX doesn't have the "dark atmosphere" of FFVI and FFVII but I do feel it's story is perhaps darker than theirs on a purely philisophical level (though FFVI may be on an equal level now that I think about it). I mean we are creating artificial life forms out of the dregs of souls that escape from the Iifa Tree, who eventually become self aware and begin to learn about what living truly is.

We have a man pumping out the life force of the planet and replacing it with his own worlds so he can assimilate his race into the foriegn world. To do this he creates bio-weapons to start war and destruction to kill people all fo his plan to revive his race. Lord we don't even go into the consequences of what happens to the souls that don't make it back to the planet outside of them becoming Mist and ingredients to manufacture Black Mages.

Kuja ends up trying to destroy all life cause the idea that the world will go on after he dies offends him, so now everyone should die with him. I mean the whole game is about facing your mortality. It's about learning what's important to us before we lose it. IX has a higher bodycount and property damage than both FFVII and FFVIII. It's due to the fact that death is everywhere in the game and we only begin to face our own mortality when death is staring us in the face. I find all of this to be pretty damn dark compared to some of the other games.

Quote:

---

I'd say only FF5 even comes close to not being "mostly serious", unless you just mean that only FF1 and FF2 don't have any lighthearted moments, which might be true.

---

I agree, and FFI and FFII have really no light hearted moments put into them but I stated that it was probably due to the time they were made.

Quote:

---

I disagree sharply with this last sentence that's basically the opposite of how I feel. FF9 has the worst world design in the series (except for the mist continent, which is just decent), a disappointing villain who is not in the league of Sephiroth (himself arguably overrated, but villains haven't generally been a strong point of the FF series), and uninteresting characters except for Vivi. This isn't the place for another debate about this though :p.

---

I feel we will have to agree to disagree. To me FFIX is the best of PS1 generation, but that is my personal opinion. I do feel that is a debate for another time though as it's been discussed to death in the General FF forum.

I laugh at anyone who says Sephiroth is even a good villain let alone better than Kuja. Sephiroth kills people and wants to hurt the planet..... Kuja on the other hand starts off starting wars and tricking people (not like that slash everyone Sephiroth). Kuja then wants to take power from his master (another part of his personality, yes personality something sephiroth lacks). Then he ends up facing his own mortality and decides to destroy everything (good reason, not Sephiroth's 'because mommy said so'). Kuja is the best villain in Final Fantasy history (not oppinion as his views and personality make up a great villan, Kefka is just crazy which isn't a redeeming for a MAIN villain).

I feel that 9 had great graphics you only didn't like them because you were used to 1-6 style. Overall the graphics had way more detail and didn't feel rough like 6's graphics. The thing that set FF9 apart were the great cut scenes that were good to watch and added alot to the story.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trance_Kuja

I laugh at anyone who says Sephiroth is even a good villain let alone better than Kuja. Sephiroth kills people and wants to hurt the planet..... Kuja on the other hand starts off starting wars and tricking people (not like that slash everyone Sephiroth). Kuja then wants to take power from his master (another part of his personality, yes personality something sephiroth lacks). Then he ends up facing his own mortality and decides to destroy everything (good reason, not Sephiroth's 'because mommy said so'). Kuja is the best villain in Final Fantasy history (not oppinion as his views and personality make up a great villan, Kefka is just crazy which isn't a redeeming for a MAIN villain).

---

As the author of my signature said on another occasion: "Kuja is a disappointment as a villain. He is a Dr. Evil stereotype with a bishonen character design."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by forgotten_fantasy

I feel that 9 had great graphics you only didn't like them because you were used to 1-6 style. Overall the graphics had way more detail and didn't feel rough like 6's graphics. The thing that set FF9 apart were the great cut scenes that were good to watch and added alot to the story.

---

I liked the overall graphics in FF8, and some of the pre-rendered backgrounds in FF9 (Memoria looks nice). What I didn't like was the way that the cartoony/SD designs looked in the form of full sized 3D polygonal models (I think Chrono Cross pulled this off better). The PSX's hardware doesn't do a good job in FF9 as the texture mapping was just too primitive and the polygon counts were low. Your characters and some of the monsters look like big, grainy puppets. It contributes to the overall "kookiness" of the game that puts me off. The cut scenes were pretty good though.

This was actually the first FF game I ever played which is why I'm so in love with it, (I've played on every Final Fantasy before this also). People have commented on the cartoony style which I thought was quite charming, I think it was done in an effort to make everything a little less morbid. I mean it's going to be more disturbing to see a kingdom full of properly proportioned people burned alive by black mages than it will if they were all chibi's, remember kids flaming chibis are funny.
Also the FF9 game was made to incorporate the differences in proportion of the characters surroundings to the actual characters that were found in the original games (It would be more noticeable if they had visible ceilings I'm sure).
As for Kuja I first thought he was a she (he was wearing a thong and I was 12, come on) but overall a pretty cool badguy, not the best but good in the fact that you could relate to him in the way he reacted to his mortality ( I'm not saying we all want to blow up the world but in the fact that if we do bite the big one that the world is going to keep on going without us, this fact may get one or two people thinking hey well I don't really want that)
The graphics were good for their time, the choppy graphics of the battles and ingame characters were the weakest point and even then I've always thought they were pretty cool. I mean this was on the PS1 look at the other games that were out for it and not just the RPG's they were all choppy by todays standards
My contribution is over *bows*

How does Alexandria look anything like Emerald City of the town with the dwarves in the game? I mean look at the comparisons!http://www.uga.edu/sa/Pictures/Sprin...ald_City_2.jpg
http://www.radioblogger.com/images/munchkins.jpg
http://www.rpgfan.com/pics/ff9/map01.jpghttp://home.tiscalinet.ch/johnchoy/i...views/ff91.jpg

I don't think that Alexandria literally looks like anything in the Wizard of Oz. I was referring more to its general atmosphere (and that of the whole game). FF9 has an atmosphere that one might describe as "whimsical", "zany" and "kooky", like TWoO but not like the rest of the FF series.

Consider this....

Many of the game's terminology, names, and roles where tributes to the past...

-Vivi was designed like the past Black Mages (Last appearence of Black Mage before FFIX: FFV). Also the Black Mage race reentered the series.

-Garland was a tribute to well... Garland of the past (FFI)

-Kuja in many ways was a tribute to Kefka. (Kefka looked silly and got made fun of for that, same with Kuja. FFVIKefka started off as the right hand man of a Ruler only to overthrough him same with Kuja. FFVI and FFIXKefka and Kuja both obtained the power they wanted.)

-Deathguise was named after Deathguise.

- A return of the old Summons (Ramuh, for example)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goldenboko

Consider this....

Many of the game's terminology, names, and roles where tributes to the past...

-Vivi was designed like the past Black Mages (Last appearence of Black Mage before FFIX: FFV). Also the Black Mage race reentered the series.

-Garland was a tribute to well... Garland of the past (FFI)

-Kuja in many ways was a tribute to Kefka. (Kefka looked silly and got made fun of for that, same with Kuja. FFVIKefka started off as the right hand man of a Ruler only to overthrough him same with Kuja. FFVI and FFIXKefka and Kuja both obtained the power they wanted.)

-Deathguise was named after Deathguise.

- A return of the old Summons (Ramuh, for example)

---

Don't forget the moogles! They own.

I believe that there's no way that future games are necessarily going to root back to the earlier FFs. I think Final Fantasy has become popular because each game is individually different from the rest. I haven't necessarily considered FFIX to be created as "cartoony" because they want it to resemble earlier games, I just figured it was creating a different environment and characters that strayed away from the FFVII and FFVIII look.

I don't feel this game is anything disney-ish. I think back on some of th e places like Burmecia and Treno and think these cities are very different from anything I have ever seen. The characters to me are also well-developed. Steiner can get a bit annoying, but he's definitely interesting. Zidane's a total pervert. Quina's just weird...etc. And I liked Kuja, he ended up not being as bad as you thought he was.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by darksword12

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goldenboko

Consider this....

Many of the game's terminology, names, and roles where tributes to the past...

-Vivi was designed like the past Black Mages (Last appearence of Black Mage before FFIX: FFV). Also the Black Mage race reentered the series.

-Garland was a tribute to well... Garland of the past (FFI)

-Kuja in many ways was a tribute to Kefka. (Kefka looked silly and got made fun of for that, same with Kuja. FFVIKefka started off as the right hand man of a Ruler only to overthrough him same with Kuja. FFVI and FFIXKefka and Kuja both obtained the power they wanted.)

-Deathguise was named after Deathguise.

- A return of the old Summons (Ramuh, for example)

---

Don't forget the moogles! They own.

---

Ah yes, who could forget the moogles (me appearently).

Bah. Final Fantasy IX is the best game ever.

I just came back to these forums after a long absence, so I cant be bothered to post a long post. But FFIX is the definition of Final Fantasy. Ahh this game is the best in my mind. By a clear (but not massive) difference.

People dislike FFIX because they're horrible idiots.

*ahem*

No, it does get back to its roots in one respect: There's a Black Mage who's completely useless and gets upstaged embarrassingly by the Summoners :P
Gimme one of them Red Mages running around the towns and villages anyday.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Psi

People dislike FFIX because they're horrible idiots.

*ahem*

No, it does get back to its roots in one respect: There's a Black Mage who's completely useless and gets upstaged embarrassingly by the Summoners :P
Gimme one of them Red Mages running around the towns and villages anyday.

---

Vivi is FAR from useless. If anything, the summons are useless. Eiko and Garnet are healers, who cares for their summons? They don't do massive damage unless you take time to collect 99 of a summon's gem and even then you have to be lucky to not have to heal that turn and to have the full summon animation.

Vivi's Trance + Flare (2 times) = win

Or

Vivi's Trance + Shadow Absorbing Equipment + Doomsday = win

And Vivi + Steiner is win as well. But Steiner has Shock, so you don't really need Doomsday sword.

i have to agree with the threadstarter.

IX used to be my favorite in the series. But after my last play a few months ago i was left with a feeling of disappointment from the ending.

I realized IX does not stackup as a standalone FF, but is a tribute to the series - for no reason but the sake of being a tribute.

Which it fails at. The game is loaded with references to older FF's for no reason other than to reference them.

I find it ironic that all the elitists who lament over square's commercial exploitation of the series pick IX as the 2nd best (because, of course, no game could EVER possibly be better than VI). Because here it is - this game is the biggest commercial milking of the series. It simply uses old names on things that have nothing to do with older games, nor do they enrich either IX or the point of reference.

I have to also agree that the lightheartedness and cartoonishness defeat the objective, although those are 2 points i really like about it.

i also have to agree that XII actually accomplishes references done right, but i have such a love-hate relationship with that game, im not going to get into it.

I agree with the topic starter, Neo-Omega Mk XXV.

Final Fantasy IX, to me, was not a special game. It took elements from previous Final Fantasy games and made a somewhat lighthearted attempt at reliving the classic moments of the series.

I have to admit that I am heavily biased, and, because of this, I disliked most of the cast because it consists of demihuman characters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

I realized IX does not stackup as a standalone FF, but is a tribute to the series - for no reason but the sake of being a tribute.

Which it fails at. The game is loaded with references to older FF's for no reason other than to reference them.

---

That statement is incorrect, be it for the very fact that I have a friend who hasn't played any FF but IX and fell in love with it so much that he played it all night after I lend him the game.

Even one of my parents played IX without playing any of the other FF's and loved it.

People too often accuse IX of being unable to stand on its own legs because it has references to the past FF's. Which is incredibly incorrect. It stands tall amongst all the others of the series as a stand-alone game. The references are just a nice bonus, but not required to enjoy the game for what it is: the 9th entry in a series of great RPG games.

And yes, for me IX will always be the best. Better than VI yes, for that game's second half was... let me put it as 'bad'. And I played IX before I played a lot of other FF games. So I didn't get most of the references either. Until I recently replayed it and loved it even more.

To back up what Elpizo said, FFIX is my first FF and is my favourite.
Anyone who says FFIX cant stand on its own is talking crap.

I havnt even played FFI - VI, but FFIX feels the most complete game to me out of VII - XII. As Emipzo said, the references are just added bonuses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elpizo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

I realized IX does not stackup as a standalone FF, but is a tribute to the series - for no reason but the sake of being a tribute.

Which it fails at. The game is loaded with references to older FF's for no reason other than to reference them.

---

That statement is incorrect, be it for the very fact that I have a friend who hasn't played any FF but IX and fell in love with it so much that he played it all night after I lend him the game.

Even one of my parents played IX without playing any of the other FF's and loved it.

People too often accuse IX of being unable to stand on its own legs because it has references to the past FF's. Which is incredibly incorrect. It stands tall amongst all the others of the series as a stand-alone game. The references are just a nice bonus, but not required to enjoy the game for what it is: the 9th entry in a series of great RPG games.

And yes, for me IX will always be the best. Better than VI yes, for that game's second half was... let me put it as 'bad'. And I played IX before I played a lot of other FF games. So I didn't get most of the references either. Until I recently replayed it and loved it even more.

---

that's not what i meant when i said it's not as much of a stand-alone game. What I mean is that the last time I played it, I felt more like it was a mix of every other FF than it's own, distinct mark on the series. It was probably the first FF that didn't bring anything new to the table. But of course, that's just my opinion.

FFIX is special to me because it was the 2nd one I really got into. The first was VII, but I just adore IX.

Wait, FF IX the Biggest Money Milking Game From Square? Need I Bring up the FF VII Compilation?

Not saying its bad, I actually enjoy it, but come on.

I just say it is what happens when you try way too hard to be something you are.

For me, FFIX was the most epic Final Fantasy. Had the best cast, the best story and was hilarious.

One thing I dislike about a lot of Final Fantasys is their lack of humour. To me, even if it wasnt necessarily completely original, it is what defines a perfect FF game.

IX was an amazing game. The story was amazingly charming and philisophical. The gameplay was spot on and I really enjoyed the character specialization, rather than just open ended job creating. Don't get me wrong I love being able to customize my character's jobs, but sometimes it can get too messy and detract from the story (I was not a fan of the Sphere Grid or XII's thing.) I'm not saying that the other Final Fantasys were bad, but IX just stands out in my mind as the most memorable and overal enjoyable.

Final Fantasy IX was the last of it's kind, the last PS1 Final Fantasy, the last Final Fantasy with thinking deeper than "OMGEZ MY OLD MAN IS THE BOSS CHARACTER WTF I DON'T REALLY EXIST 0_o" It was the first Final Fantasy I played, (and I own all the others bar FFIII and FFXI) IX will always be my favourite as it was a lot more cheerful and colourful the characters were fun and weird and although I never thought any of them were cool or bishie I loved the characters despite that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yukki-Chan

Final Fantasy IX was the last of it's kind, the last PS1 Final Fantasy, the last Final Fantasy with thinking deeper than "OMGEZ MY OLD MAN IS THE BOSS CHARACTER WTF I DON'T REALLY EXIST 0_o" It was the first Final Fantasy I played, (and I own all the others bar FFIII and FFXI) IX will always be my favourite as it was a lot more cheerful and colourful the characters were fun and weird and although I never thought any of them were cool or bishie I loved the characters despite that.

---

that's a horrible summation of X's plot.

Matter of fact, it's ironic, because techincally "OMGEZ MY OLD MAN IS THE BOSS CHARACTER WTF I DON'T REALLY EXIST 0_o" is really the plot of IX, except the father dies and he has to fight his brother.

Well you can't really simplify either game's plot like that because theres so much more to each game. I will say I think the Active Time Event system did the best of expanding the characters and themes. Thats why I enjoyed IX as much as I did.

Yeah. I agree, ATE's were amazing.

I hope they reintroduce them in later games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

that's a horrible summation of X's plot.

Matter of fact, it's ironic, because techincally "OMGEZ MY OLD MAN IS THE BOSS CHARACTER WTF I DON'T REALLY EXIST 0_o" is really the plot of IX, except the father dies and he has to fight his brother.

---

hehe I was trying to point out that the plot and thought behind the storyline in IX is more well thought out and explored than X. I agree the storylines have similarities but their presented differently and I believe it was better done by in IX
Also loved the ATE's!

:twocents: FFIX returns to the roots of the series in that the two previous games were a huge deviation from I-VI. IX puts the Fantasy back in Final Fantasy.

And as far as absurd appearances goes... *coughKefkacough* ;)

I think FFIX was more of a "step back." As in Square decided they didn't want to continue with the high-tech universe (well FFXIII looks like it is going back to the high-tech universe but roll with me here) so decided to add more of a fantasy and FF1-6 style to it. A good example are the characters. I don't see a Gunblade user or a arm-cannon gunner or a moogle-riding cat here do I? No, all of the characters were based off jobs/characters from past games (Zidane is a theif, Steiner is a Warrior, Vivi is a Black Mage naturally, Garnet is based off the young Rydia, etc.).

The other is that it has more of a fantasy feel than FFVI-VIII. I mean you easily go through that game without seeing much technology except those found in FFI-V anyways (IE Airship). Yes it does have a cartonny style to it. But also because of the graphics in the FFI-VI era creativity was technologically limited, and in the era of FFIX that wasn't the case.

Am I saying that FFIX accomplished going to the series roots again? No. I am saying though it has gotten back to the roots out of all the games in the Sony era.

Oh, and let us not forget about the crystals...

When people say that IX went back to Final Fantasy roots, I agree with it partially because VII and VIII were very much different and were very futuristic when compared with I to VI.

When FFIX came along, it was much more like I through to VI than it was to VII and VIII if you catch my drift. If I had to categorise them, I'd put them something like this:

I, II, III, IV, V, VI and IX.

Then...

VII, VIII, X, X-2 and now XII - (Which are more futuristic in their worlds).

I'll sum them up from what I know about them.

FFI - I don't know much about. Haven't played it much, but it was the first of its kind, and therefore true to itself. One fine point is that is has four "heroes".

FFII - I've not played much of this one either, but it's almost identical to I in the way it works. And again, it has four heroes - but this time they have some kind of personality to them and already have names.

FFIII - Only just started to play it on the DS. Never had a chance to play the original. Still, it feels completely traditional to its predecessors. And of course for the third time running, four heroes (that are named like in FFII).

FFIV - I've played most of it, and it feels like a true hero fantasy story to me. You know, Cecil and Rosa, and then the powerful evil Golbez. Again, traditional.

FFV - I would brand it the same as FFIV, though there are four true heroes which reverts back to how FFs I, II and III worked.

FFVI - It felt like it was set in a time like the 1600s-1700s. A sort of Industrial Revolution kind of setting. It was much different to its five predecessors, and had many more playable characters, each with an inspiring personality. It was still done in the traditional FF style to date.

FFVII - Ah, now we're seeing change. The world is starting to become a bit more 3D, although the environments were pre-rendered. It's not top down anymore to say the least. It sells more copies than any other FF game, and it's world is set in a dark, very industrial future. It still copied most ideals from the earlier games. The difference was the very dark industrial setting.

FFVIII - Suddenly everything goes futuristic again, but in what seems to be a much brighter world. You can't really see evidence of pollution, and the world itself appears to be quite content in the long run. Buildings look bright and colourful. Balamb garden first appeared to me to look like a futuristic church, and the bells sound like there is a wedding going on. This game didn't feel quite so Final Fantasy like as the others to me. Maybe the graphics and drastic change in the world gave that impression?

FFIX - Now we're getting to the point. Ask yourself how much this game has in common with VII and VIII. In my opinion, very little. When I compare it with every game before VII, it feels like its world has returned to the way the others worked. The world was much more medieval/renaissance, and the airships served a much wider purpose. I like VIII, don't get me wrong, but flying schools fighting one another just didn't really do it for me. That's what I feel is meant by going back to Final Fantasy roots.

I can't be bothered to go over the others really. X and X-2 felt similar to VIII in terms of the bright and colourful world, and XII feels like a graphically up to date version of Vagrant Story rather than a Final Fantasy game. In addition to that, the airship scenes and imperial city of Archades reek of Star Wars no?

Speaking of Disney movies, Garnet's singing was very Disney Princessish.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DM_Melkhar

When people say that IX went back to Final Fantasy roots, I agree with it partially because VII and VIII were very much different and were very futuristic when compared with I to VI.

---

I would say that calling any of them futuristic is baseless. the worlds in VII and VIII contrast high technology with low tech, as has happened in every FF world since I. In Sky Fortress, you have computers analyzing Tiamat, and robot soldiers trying to stop you every step of the way.

Alot of the technology in VII isn't futuristic, their vehicles are all very crude. alot of shinra's machinery was supposed to have a World War II look to it. In VIII, you have futuristic civs like Esthar, but then you have modern ones like Galbadia, and older ones like Windhill.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DM_Melkhar

When people say that IX went back to Final Fantasy roots, I agree with it partially because VII and VIII were very much different and were very futuristic when compared with I to VI.

---

I would say that calling any of them futuristic is baseless. the worlds in VII and VIII contrast high technology with low tech, as has happened in every FF world since I. In Sky Fortress, you have computers analyzing Tiamat, and robot soldiers trying to stop you every step of the way.

Alot of the technology in VII isn't futuristic, their vehicles are all very crude. alot of shinra's machinery was supposed to have a World War II look to it. In VIII, you have futuristic civs like Esthar, but then you have modern ones like Galbadia, and older ones like Windhill.

---

Though I agree with you Bolivar, I think he was getting at the point that the ratio of technology to medieval was a little more even and in VIII's case higher than previous games. I mean VII and VIII were the first FF's that allowed you to use guns for your characters. To be honest VI also should be lumped into the hi-tech department since it's world is decidely "steam punk".

But the first five games in the series only had one or two locations with decidedly high technology, and most of these places are usually the works of "long forgotten civilizations that perished eons ago".

IX does have quite a bit og hi-tech going on for it, but at least it's based on tools and equipment the overall level of technology of the world should have. The only things that are decidely too advanced for the world, are airships, the airship hangars in Cid's kingdom, and the machine that manufactures the Black Mages. But at least both have some roundabout explanantions. Airships at least seem to once again come from a lost civilization from the forgotten continent (the one where you fight Ark) and the BM machine was developed by Kuja who actually hails from an advanced civilization.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DM_Melkhar

When people say that IX went back to Final Fantasy roots, I agree with it partially because VII and VIII were very much different and were very futuristic when compared with I to VI.

---

I would say that calling any of them futuristic is baseless. the worlds in VII and VIII contrast high technology with low tech, as has happened in every FF world since I. In Sky Fortress, you have computers analyzing Tiamat, and robot soldiers trying to stop you every step of the way.

Alot of the technology in VII isn't futuristic, their vehicles are all very crude. alot of shinra's machinery was supposed to have a World War II look to it. In VIII, you have futuristic civs like Esthar, but then you have modern ones like Galbadia, and older ones like Windhill.

---

Though I agree with you Bolivar, I think he was getting at the point that the ratio of technology to medieval was a little more even and in VIII's case higher than previous games. I mean VII and VIII were the first FF's that allowed you to use guns for your characters. To be honest VI also should be lumped into the hi-tech department since it's world is decidely "steam punk".

But the first five games in the series only had one or two locations with decidedly high technology, and most of these places are usually the works of "long forgotten civilizations that perished eons ago".

IX does have quite a bit og hi-tech going on for it, but at least it's based on tools and equipment the overall level of technology of the world should have. The only things that are decidely too advanced for the world, are airships, the airship hangars in Cid's kingdom, and the machine that manufactures the Black Mages. But at least both have some roundabout explanantions. Airships at least seem to once again come from a lost civilization from the forgotten continent (the one where you fight Ark) and the BM machine was developed by Kuja who actually hails from an advanced civilization.

---

Very true. I wouldn't say it's a matter of being futuristic/past, but the medieval civilization as you pointed out is definately something missing from VII and VIII. At the same time, those games use areas that would actually be considered older, less advanced, such as Windhill in VIII or Cosmo Canyon & the Chocobo Ranch in VII.

I think that the contrast between highly and lower advanced civilizations is something that's been used more due to the increase in technology in games over the years - they're able to put more detail & effort into them now than in the earlier ones. Now they're able to portray different types of older civilizations, such as Polynesian in X or the Egyptian/Mesopotamia type places in XII.



Getting back on topic, I think that's Sakaguchi's blunder in this game. While Kitase and Nomura were able to contrast the advanced/what-would-be-considered-less advanced aspects within and amongst societies, Sakaguchi just kind of made the stereotypical FF game. When in fact, it's that creativity and newness that itself has always been crucial to the FF feel, especially since VI.

edit: that failure to take a chance is probably one of the reasons the execs at square were debating making this game separate from the main series.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trance_Kuja

I laugh at anyone who says Sephiroth is even a good villain let alone better than Kuja. Sephiroth kills people and wants to hurt the planet..... Kuja on the other hand starts off starting wars and tricking people (not like that slash everyone Sephiroth). Kuja then wants to take power from his master (another part of his personality, yes personality something sephiroth lacks). Then he ends up facing his own mortality and decides to destroy everything (good reason, not Sephiroth's 'because mommy said so'). Kuja is the best villain in Final Fantasy history (not oppinion as his views and personality make up a great villan, Kefka is just crazy which isn't a redeeming for a MAIN villain).

---

I agree with this, except I feel that Sephiroth is better as a character than Kuja, mostly cuz he's a badass. But in terms of being a villain, Kuja takes second (next to Kefka, obviously) due to his brilliant tactics, while Sephiroth's "plan" was just to cast a big spell and get the power that comes with it, but I do like hack-and-slash villains to an extent.

For me personally i find that FFIX is purely 'fantasy'...as much as i love the other games they all seem to be in some way (such as FF7) a bleak post apocalyptic kinda feel....they are not all like this but it just gives me the impression that most people are in depression....FFIX just has a completely diffrent feel for me and seems more of an adventure..although im not saying any of the others are worse in any way....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KasaiDraco

Speaking of Disney movies, Garnet's singing was very Disney Princessish.

---

Is that a bad thing?

Very bad. Horrible. Did you play kingdom hearts? :tongue:

^Yep, a total flop.

Didn't sell a copy, if I remember correctly.