How much did Final Fantasy VII revolutionise the series?

In the 'I REVIVED AERIS' thread, me and another member called grim07 were 'discussing' how much this game revolutionised the series as a whole, compared to some of the other games (amongst others: X, VI and I). Well, obviously, that thread got locked for going off topic, but now, the discussion can continue here!

Personally, i don't think the game revolutionised the series as much as everyone is making out it did. Sure, it had it's moments (the graphics of the time), but it also had it's downers (a main villian that you don't even meet until disk 2, and even then, you don't fight it until disk 3). I'm in the camp that believes that if it wasn't for I, then we wouldn't all be here today, and Square would be a nobody.

Final Fantasy VII didn't revolutionize the series. Final Fantasy VII revolutionized the GENRE, and maybe even games as a whole. I still haven't played a game to this day that has had an impact on me as much as FFVIII did.

You're right that if it weren't for the original Final Fantasy, there would be none. But most of the Final Fantasies revolutionized the series in their own ways. Final Fantasy V and Final Fantasy IX didn't, but that doesn't make them bad games. They're actually quite enjoyable. The rest of them did in some way or another.

If FFVII would have failed, there would have been many new sequel.

i agree with The Ceej, each final fantasy has its own good and bad parts, 7 just happens to apparently be "the one that changed the series:rolleyes2 " because it was most peoples first;)

Final Fantasy VII revolutionized the Final Fantasy series in a number of ways.

1. First 3D FF game
2. First FF game on CD
3. First RPG to kill off one of the beloved main characters

Those are just three factors. The rest is a matter of opinion. Music, characters, storyline, even the main character (instead of being the heroic uppety main character in most RPG's, we get a cold, uncaring individual, who has to find himself throughout the game)

It also went away from the "fantasy" setting into a more sci-fi direction, which was ANOTHER first for the series.

And it still continues to sell more copies then any other FF TO THIS DAY. 10 years after its release. Name any other RPG in a series that can do that.

Final Fantasy I-VI revolutionized the way RPG's were played. VII revolutionized the way they were played AND the way the series as a whole is played. Which is why their making XIII to be set in a more sci-fi setting like VII and VIII AND why they made "compilation of FFVII".

And its damn sure not because the game sucks.

You can love it or you can hate it, but you cannot deny that it revolutionized Final Fantasy, RPG's and many games as a whole.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

Final Fantasy VII revolutionized the Final Fantasy series in a number of ways.

1. First 3D FF game
2. First FF game on CD
3. First RPG to kill off one of the beloved main characters

---

sorry to be a smartass, but...

1. The series' graphics were always improving, so advancing to 3D like every other game of the time was in no way revolutionary.

2. Changing the method for storing game data is not revolutionary.

3. False.

Final Fantasy VII was NOT the first in the series to distance itself from the medieval fantasy setting.

most things that are considered "revolutionary" in FF7 appeared in earlier installments.

The only revolutionary aspect of FF7 was the excellent, complex storyline. That's it. I'm not saying that it's music, gameplay, characters, or graphics weren't great, but they just weren't revolutionary when compared to, lets say, FF6.

VII certainly set the bar for Playstation games. It was pretty much unparalled in terms of scope and grand storytelling at the time, what with the new storage medium and lots of FMVs.

Revolutionized is a pretty strong word. I think VII really had a pretty big impact for its time, and there likely wouldn't have been nearly as many RPGs on the Playstation if it hadn't been so successful. I think it took the series in a new direction as well, but that's not really revolutionary. If it revolutionized anything, it was probably the depiction of protagonists. Cloud really started a longlasting trend of heroes with megaspiky hair.

Yeah, i agree, it did revolutionize the series a little, but then, every game did that.

FFVII was significant because it popularized the genre, and although there were parts of the game which were revolutionary for its time, I think that is going to be its legacy.

.02

The graphics were bomb, it had the best plot, and everyone liked it.

(Not to mention it racked up the big bucks)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by silentenigma

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

Final Fantasy VII revolutionized the Final Fantasy series in a number of ways.

1. First 3D FF game
2. First FF game on CD
3. First RPG to kill off one of the beloved main characters

---

sorry to be a smartass, but...

1. The series' graphics were always improving, so advancing to 3D like every other game of the time was in no way revolutionary.

2. Changing the method for storing game data is not revolutionary.

3. False.

Final Fantasy VII was NOT the first in the series to distance itself from the medieval fantasy setting.

most things that are considered "revolutionary" in FF7 appeared in earlier installments.

The only revolutionary aspect of FF7 was the excellent, complex storyline. That's it. I'm not saying that it's music, gameplay, characters, or graphics weren't great, but they just weren't revolutionary when compared to, lets say, FF6.

---

1. Maybe so, but Final Fantasy VII was the FIRST 3D FINAL FANTASY. Which is revolutionary, whether you wanna admit it or not. I dont care if thats where games where heading, or whatever, it still revolutionized the series by being the first.

2. Its not? I seem to remember nintendo saying they would never switch to CD and Playstation being the one who did. I think putting video games on a CD, (as with Movies being on DVD) is pretty revolutionary. Do you even know what revolutionary means?

3. Name an RPG before FFVII that killed off one of the important main characters that was in the story for almost half of the game. Name a Final Fantasy that went away from the fantasy setting to Sci-Fi. And no VI didnt do that. It still had the "magic war" and what not. Castles and knights. Kings and Queens. So did V IV III II AND I.

I dont see 3D graphics apearing in earlier instalments. I dont see angsty protagonists appearing in earlier installments, I dont see main characters dying in earlier installments.

Come on, man. No, "every game" is NOT revolutionary. Revolutionary is a game that brings change to the series, alters it in such a way that people 10 years later STILL play it and games are STILL being based off of that world. THAT is revolutionary.

Before I even respond to your posts I want to point out:

Having something new, in and of itself, is not revolutionary. Also, many of your points are related to the Playstation in general, not FFVII, such as hardware powerful enough to handle 3D graphics and the data storage meduim (CD). This would mean that the Playstation was revolutionary, not FFVII.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

1. Maybe so, but Final Fantasy VII was the FIRST 3D FINAL FANTASY. Which is revolutionary, whether you wanna admit it or not. I dont care if thats where games where heading, or whatever, it still revolutionized the series by being the first.

---

No, 3D graphics did not make it revolutionary, but rather advanced the grahpics used in the series. FFIV advanced the graphics by having the world map "flatten" when you flew the airship and using multiple scrolling backgrounds in caves, sich as the Land of the Summoned Monsters. FFVI advanced the graphics by using Mode 7 (pseudo 3D) graphics when riding a chocobo or flying an airship. FFVII advanced the graphics by switching to 3D models. FFVII's advanced graphics were no more revolutionary than any other game, but rather a reflection of the graphical power of the new gaming console. And just because it was the first to use 3D graphics doesn't make it revolutionary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

2. Its not? I seem to remember nintendo saying they would never switch to CD and Playstation being the one who did. I think putting video games on a CD, (as with Movies being on DVD) is pretty revolutionary. Do you even know what revolutionary means?

---

Square released FFVII on the Playstation because it was cheaper to produce CDs than cartidges. Again, this would mean the Playstation was revolutionary, not FFVII.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

3. Name an RPG before FFVII that killed off one of the important main characters that was in the story for almost half of the game.

---

FFII: Josef
FFIV: Tellah
FFV: Galuf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

3. Name a Final Fantasy that went away from the fantasy setting to Sci-Fi. And no VI didnt do that. It still had the "magic war" and what not. Castles and knights. Kings and Queens. So did V IV III II AND I.

---

FFVI was "half-way", considering the whole point of the story is that technology and machinery are replacing magic is one of the the main points of the story. If you're trying to argue that FFVII was revolutionary for being sci-fi, then FFVI would be more revolutionary because it paved the way for FFVII by blending sci-fi elements into a fantasy setting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

Revolutionary is a game that brings change to the series, alters it in such a way that people 10 years later STILL play it and games are STILL being based off of that world. THAT is revolutionary.

---

People play games 10 years later for a variety of reasons, revolutionary is one of the lesser reasons.

I'm going to take a guess here and say that you think FFVII is revolutionary because you hadn't played many rpg's before FFVII and it was truely revolutionary coming into a new genre with such a powerful game. But when compared with the rest of the series as it matures, it's not revolutionary, just advancing on previous ideas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by silentenigma

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

Final Fantasy VII revolutionized the Final Fantasy series in a number of ways.

1. First 3D FF game
2. First FF game on CD
3. First RPG to kill off one of the beloved main characters

---

sorry to be a smartass, but...

1. The series' graphics were always improving, so advancing to 3D like every other game of the time was in no way revolutionary.

2. Changing the method for storing game data is not revolutionary.

3. False.

Final Fantasy VII was NOT the first in the series to distance itself from the medieval fantasy setting.

most things that are considered "revolutionary" in FF7 appeared in earlier installments.

The only revolutionary aspect of FF7 was the excellent, complex storyline. That's it. I'm not saying that it's music, gameplay, characters, or graphics weren't great, but they just weren't revolutionary when compared to, lets say, FF6.

---

1. Maybe so, but Final Fantasy VII was the FIRST 3D FINAL FANTASY. Which is revolutionary, whether you wanna admit it or not. I dont care if thats where games where heading, or whatever, it still revolutionized the series by being the first.

2. Its not? I seem to remember nintendo saying they would never switch to CD and Playstation being the one who did. I think putting video games on a CD, (as with Movies being on DVD) is pretty revolutionary. Do you even know what revolutionary means?

3. Name an RPG before FFVII that killed off one of the important main characters that was in the story for almost half of the game. Name a Final Fantasy that went away from the fantasy setting to Sci-Fi. And no VI didnt do that. It still had the "magic war" and what not. Castles and knights. Kings and Queens. So did V IV III II AND I.

I dont see 3D graphics apearing in earlier instalments. I dont see angsty protagonists appearing in earlier installments, I dont see main characters dying in earlier installments.

Come on, man. No, "every game" is NOT revolutionary. Revolutionary is a game that brings change to the series, alters it in such a way that people 10 years later STILL play it and games are STILL being based off of that world. THAT is revolutionary.

---

Your crediting things to FFVII that don't belong to FFVII. If you say 3D graphics and CD's revolutionized FF, then your saying the PS1's capabilities revolutionized FFs NOT FFVII.

As for main characters, that proves your lack of knowledge on the earlier installments FFIV, FFII, FFV, and FFVITellah died in FFIV, Galuf died in FFV, Minwu, Joseph, Cid, and one more that I can't remember died in FFII, and in FFVI shadow can die if you don't save him. All of those characters where in there for half the storyline. Actually Aerith WASN'T in there for half the storyline seeing how she died in disc 1. And as for the final comment on how people still play it and things are still based on it. That proves nothing. There are plenty of old FF remakes, and Dissida is going to be based off many FFs. Also lots and lots of people still play the older games after MORE then 10 years. I myself have just picked up FFII recently.

That argument closed my thread:mad2:

I think it did.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by demondude55

That argument closed my thread:mad2:

I think it did.

---

It did but two wrongs don't make a right so don't get this thread closed.

I don't want to get swept up in the fanboyism so i'm going to try to be as reasonable as possible.

But FFVII did revolutionize FF, RPGs, and video games.

My first point is going to need this disclaimer: I absolutely do not believe that better graphics make a better video game. But Squaresoft really took it to the next level and overnight became the leading publisher. They were always one of the premier names in RPGs, but after this everyone had no choice but to "follow the leader."

I'm not sure how many of you can even remember video games at the time, but this game really blew our minds when it was released. The FMVs were for the most part incomparable to any work before it. With 3d models on 2d wonderfully illustrated backgrounds, this was a gaming experience like no other. There was simply nothing like it.

The opening scene, scanning over the stars, which then fade to Aeris' face, then show her walking and the camera slowly pulls away to show an entire city like no one's ever seen before, and in big print: FINAL FANTASY VII. That alone would have been impossible for any Final Fantasy before it to do, so in a way (STRESSING "IN A WAY") the first 60 seconds of FFVII alone is better than the entire game of FFVI.

I'm going to leave the graphical aspect alone, but I'll remind everyone: at the time many games even on Playstation were still in 2d. After Final Fantasy VII, companies had to catch up, and fast, just to compete.

As far as story, on many different levels you simply cannot compare any previous FF to this game. The fact that it has social commentary is enough to blow most RPG's previously released out of the water. On the train with Barret, Cloud uses the train as a metaphor for the lives of those living in poverty. That alone is deeper than anything in the previous 6 installments.

It's fun for us to come here and talk about how each FF brought something new to the table. But this is greatly exaggerated - The First 5 games were still using the same sprites as the original installment. It wasn't until FFVI that you stopped seeing the same old man with the pointy hat. Also, VII gets criticized for its conceptual setting being a departure from the rest of the series - every FF game has high technology juxtaposed to medieval or fuedal society. And VI took it to a new level with a highly industrialized world.

But FFVII was the first to really introduce the cultures of many different civilizations into the mix. East and West are beautifully blended into a world that could very well have been in either the very distant past or future. Even the first mission, with Cloud slicing up soldiers with guns, is a reference to a real life incident when 2 samurais infiltrated and sabotaged a British production plant. It's just crazy ideas like that that really separates this game from its peers.

This game gets alot of criticism on this site, but to deny that it upped the ante for video game designers on almost every aspect is just lying to yourself.

Bolivar, I find it hard to disagree with your statements. They're eloquent and you provide good evidence. My only two comments:

While what you've explained shows how FFVII took the series "to the next level", I think that it's up to individual interpretation as to if it was revolutionary or not.

Anything related to graphics has to be taken with a grain of salt when discussing "revolutionary". As myself and Goldenboko have pointed out, you have to be careful that you are not attributing a revolutionary shift in gaming to Square when it should be attributed to Sony. True, the graphics were something we had not seen before, but that is because Sony provided Square with hardware powerful enough to run such a game, not because Square figured out some new algorithms or some such to completely reinvent what was possible on the Super Famicom/Nintendo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

As far as story, on many different levels you simply cannot compare any previous FF to this game. The fact that it has social commentary is enough to blow most RPG's previously released out of the water. On the train with Barret, Cloud uses the train as a metaphor for the lives of those living in poverty. That alone is deeper than anything in the previous 6 installments.

---

O rly?
That was a scene from the end of Final Fantasy VI, and in my opinion the most epic scene from any FF ever. The was dialogue fantastic, deep, and moving. I've don't find any scene in FFVII to be better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flying Mullet

Before I even respond to your posts I want to point out:

Having something new, in and of itself, is not revolutionary. Also, many of your points are related to the Playstation in general, not FFVII, such as hardware powerful enough to handle 3D graphics and the data storage meduim (CD). This would mean that the Playstation was revolutionary, not FFVII.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

1. Maybe so, but Final Fantasy VII was the FIRST 3D FINAL FANTASY. Which is revolutionary, whether you wanna admit it or not. I dont care if thats where games where heading, or whatever, it still revolutionized the series by being the first.

---

No, 3D graphics did not make it revolutionary, but rather advanced the grahpics used in the series. FFIV advanced the graphics by having the world map "flatten" when you flew the airship and using multiple scrolling backgrounds in caves, sich as the Land of the Summoned Monsters. FFVI advanced the graphics by using Mode 7 (pseudo 3D) graphics when riding a chocobo or flying an airship. FFVII advanced the graphics by switching to 3D models. FFVII's advanced graphics were no more revolutionary than any other game, but rather a reflection of the graphical power of the new gaming console. And just because it was the first to use 3D graphics doesn't make it revolutionary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

2. Its not? I seem to remember nintendo saying they would never switch to CD and Playstation being the one who did. I think putting video games on a CD, (as with Movies being on DVD) is pretty revolutionary. Do you even know what revolutionary means?

---

Square released FFVII on the Playstation because it was cheaper to produce CDs than cartidges. Again, this would mean the Playstation was revolutionary, not FFVII.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

3. Name an RPG before FFVII that killed off one of the important main characters that was in the story for almost half of the game.

---

FFII: Josef
FFIV: Tellah
FFV: Galuf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

3. Name a Final Fantasy that went away from the fantasy setting to Sci-Fi. And no VI didnt do that. It still had the "magic war" and what not. Castles and knights. Kings and Queens. So did V IV III II AND I.

---

FFVI was "half-way", considering the whole point of the story is that technology and machinery are replacing magic is one of the the main points of the story. If you're trying to argue that FFVII was revolutionary for being sci-fi, then FFVI would be more revolutionary because it paved the way for FFVII by blending sci-fi elements into a fantasy setting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

Revolutionary is a game that brings change to the series, alters it in such a way that people 10 years later STILL play it and games are STILL being based off of that world. THAT is revolutionary.

---

People play games 10 years later for a variety of reasons, revolutionary is one of the lesser reasons.

I'm going to take a guess here and say that you think FFVII is revolutionary because you hadn't played many rpg's before FFVII and it was truely revolutionary coming into a new genre with such a powerful game. But when compared with the rest of the series as it matures, it's not revolutionary, just advancing on previous ideas.

---

revolutionary - Definitions from Dictionary.com

I rest my case

It seems you all forget what revolutionary means. The playstation was a revolutionary system. We're talking about Final Fantasy. Yes, VII was released on the Playstation, making IT THE FIRST 3D AND FIRTS FF ON CD. Bringing new change to a series is revolutionary. Voice acting in FFX was revolutionary for Final Fantasy, as none of the previouse installments had it. But the most benchmark revolutionary aspects take place in FF VII, making IT the MOST revolutionary.

Every FF brought something new to the table. But VII kicked it up about 5 notches. Like I said, you can have your personal opinions about the story, but the game is a favorite in many peoples hearts, even after they played I-VI. And that alone says something.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Your source

radically new or innovative; outside or beyond established procedure, principles, etc

---

Radically new? Whats so readically new? The battle system had very few changes, the newest things it had was limits, which were started in FFVI. The graphics we new, but thats not because of square but because of Sony graphics voice acting, all of that mainly pertains to a system not to a specifc game until the game pushes the system's limit.
Your source only helped Mullet and I.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

revolutionary - Definitions from Dictionary.com

I rest my case

It seems you all forget what revolutionary means. The playstation was a revolutionary system. We're talking about Final Fantasy. Yes, VII was released on the Playstation, making IT THE FIRST 3D AND FIRTS FF ON CD. Bringing new change to a series is revolutionary. Voice acting in FFX was revolutionary for Final Fantasy, as none of the previouse installments had it. But the most benchmark revolutionary aspects take place in FF VII, making IT the MOST revolutionary.

Every FF brought something new to the table. But VII kicked it up about 5 notches. Like I said, you can have your personal opinions about the story, but the game is a favorite in many peoples hearts, even after they played I-VI. And that alone says something.

---

You rest your Case??
But you didn't even gave proof of anything.
And your already giving up...?

What was really so revolutionary about the PS1?
Because it played music? Others do that.
The PS3 is the best exemple of revolutionairy.
Sony got in the top 10 compagnies in the world for the most revolutionary concept of combining all the most entertainment with it's PS3.

So bassically, making it on a CD is revolutinaire.
That means that FFIV was too for the Super Nintendo back in the day?
No? Didn't think so.

News flash, Legend of Dragoon for the PS1 used voice acting for their character way before X did.
And they also had the addition system, of which what the game is reknown for and very good!

FFVII was revolutionairy. On what? you don't even say it! Having a huge sale does not make it revolutionary.

You know, I could actually with you that it was, but there's no proof of what you are saying is true.
Until then, it just can't.
It needs a Radical Change, and they pretty much have different radical changes...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

My first point is going to need this disclaimer: I absolutely do not believe that better graphics make a better video game.

---

Correct!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

But Squaresoft really took it to the next level and overnight became the leading publisher.

---

Correct!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

They were always one of the premier names in RPGs, but after this everyone had no choice but to "follow the leader."

---

Correct!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

I'm not sure how many of you can even remember video games at the time, but this game really blew our minds when it was released. The FMVs were for the most part incomparable to any work before it. With 3d models on 2d wonderfully illustrated backgrounds, this was a gaming experience like no other. There was simply nothing like it.

---

Sorry, I would say that N64's 64bit was better than PS1's 32bit, playing Golden Eye with friends. N64 lacked of FMV support.
Not saying that FFVII's graphic wasn't good.
They were, but I didn't saw them at the time, and I bouht the N64.
So I can't say anything for or against it about the game.
But FFVIII really impressed me when I first saw...
so having the same effect, I would agree with that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

The opening scene, scanning over the stars, which then fade to Aeris' face, then show her walking and the camera slowly pulls away to show an entire city like no one's ever seen before, and in big print: FINAL FANTASY VII.

---

Same effect seing the ocean, flower plains and Rinoa's face. Then came the good part, Squall vs Seifer with FFVII flashing.
I would agree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

That alone would have been impossible for any Final Fantasy before it to do, so in a way (STRESSING "IN A WAY") the first 60 seconds of FFVII alone is better than the entire game of FFVI

---

I doubt that's true, but haven't played VI, so no comment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

I'm going to leave the graphical aspect alone, but I'll remind everyone: at the time many games even on Playstation were still in 2d. After Final Fantasy VII, companies had to catch up, and fast, just to compete.

---

Not really in the info about Sony's news at the time. No comment (wish I could back you up on this...)
However, compagnies still struggle to compete with Square-Enix.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

As far as story, on many different levels you simply cannot compare any previous FF to this game. The fact that it has social commentary is enough to blow most RPG's previously released out of the water. On the train with Barret, Cloud uses the train as a metaphor for the lives of those living in poverty. That alone is deeper than anything in the previous 6 installments.

---

How so, because people are poor?
That's just the same as a dictator, only perharps more relevent to capitalist?
Disagree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

It's fun for us to come here and talk about how each FF brought something new to the table.

---

I Agree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

But this is greatly exaggerated - The First 5 games were still using the same sprites as the original installment.

---

Correction: The first 6 games.
They weren't using the same sprite has the original.
In the SNES games, they were more detailed ''like the first Mario compared to Super Mario World''.
Disagree.
What you meant was it was 3D enviroment.
Correct!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

It wasn't until FFVI that you stopped seeing the same old man with the pointy hat.

---

It reappeared in XI.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

Also, VII gets criticized for its conceptual setting being a departure from the rest of the series -

---

I think it was a step foward for the series. Another Point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

every FF game has high technology juxtaposed to medieval or fuedal society. And VI took it to a new level with a highly industrialized world.

---

I think you meant FFVII. Only two towns are like that, Midgar and Junon. And the rest of the world is pretty empty like every other FFs...
I give points for that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

But FFVII was the first to really introduce the cultures of many different civilizations into the mix. East and West are beautifully blended into a world that could very well have been in either the very distant past or future. .

---

Someone still hasn't explain it to me how Midgar and Junon were the only real big cities the world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

Even the first mission, with Cloud slicing up soldiers with guns, is a reference to a real life incident when 2 samurais infiltrated and sabotaged a British production plant. It's just crazy ideas like that that really separates this game from its peers.

---

I didn't lisensed to the news back then, I was only 10.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

This game gets alot of criticism on this site,

---

I don't know about that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

but to deny that it upped the ante for video game designers on almost every aspect is just lying to yourself.

---

...
still no answer to anything
...
WHAT DID UPPED THE ANTE FOR VIDEO GAME DESIGNERS?

As far as I know, the same can be said about Starcraft and Diablo II when it was first released.
Using a combination of spells and skills in an MMORPG, competing and co-operating.
I would say that Blizzard really were one of the first true compagnies to really revolutionised the online gaming and community, by bringing them in the same universe and server so it's easyer to find people. Giving them channels to chat and private channels for clans and ect.
It also did a fortune too.

HEY! This is like the "Is Sephiroth the best villian in FF" thread where everyone ended up trying to knock some sense into the one's who purely wouldn't listen, then the thread just faded away with people double posting for attention that they nevergot.

Other than that, Ironically FFVII was the start of my downlike of the Final Fantasy series, because what comes up must come down, and due to the mass fan craze of this game the makers of FF now put more heart into selling this game 10 years later than they do on their genre to be saved. Meaning, No I did not like FFX, FFXI, FFXII, ANY OF THE SPIN OFFS OF ANY GAME, and I have no intentions or want to buy any FF game due to the lack of heart being put into it. Yes, they did put alot into the game, the game had heart just like everyother game before it, but I say that this game singlehandedly took down what FF was to me.

Granted I liked the game when I was 13 but now at 21, I don't find it -anywhere close- to being as great as it was when I was 13. I guess at 13 I was blinded by how 'revelotionary' this game was and came to my senses later on. And so you can't say that age has anything to do with not liking it, I love FFIV and FFVI -much- better than I did at the age of 9 and still play them both like a crazy person on crack.

The only reason I've -ever- replayed FFVII wasn't because of the great revolutionary story or what ever, it was 'cause of the chocobo racing. Which means I should really just go buy chocobo racing the game and finally get rid of this 'revolutionary' game once and for all. :rolleyes2

it wasn't that revolutionary. You equip abilities in ff5 to use them in battle, you equip relics in ff6 to get abilities, you equip materia to use abilities, etc

josef dies to save you from being crushed by a rock, tellah dies for reasons I really can't remember because I don't like that game and haven't played it in a coon's age, galuf dies to save you so you can lay some smackdown on exdeath, etc

ff1 was revolutionary in that you had big nice graphics on a new system, ff4 was revolutionary in that you had big nice graphics on a new system, ff7 was revolutionary in that you had big nice graphics on a new system, etc

Pretty much the only truly revolutionary thing is how these games revolve in circles to have the same linear growth in features.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

This game gets alot of criticism on this site,

---

I don't know about that.

...
Maybe it does, but you also have backers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hyperion4444

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

This game gets alot of criticism on this site,

---

I don't know about that.

...
Maybe it does, but you also have backers.

---

true, a lot of critism it gets in general is from people who played ff1-ff6 first, not nocking them because i am one myself:rolleyes2 but many people think ff7 is terrible because it has modern technology and things like that, Apparently it is not a traditional final fantasy,but just because ff1-ff6 came out first does not mean that it has to stick to this for ever. They tried changing it and it worked very well obviously:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by silentenigma

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

Final Fantasy VII revolutionized the Final Fantasy series in a number of ways.

1. First 3D FF game
2. First FF game on CD
3. First RPG to kill off one of the beloved main characters

---

sorry to be a smartass, but...

1. The series' graphics were always improving, so advancing to 3D like every other game of the time was in no way revolutionary.

2. Changing the method for storing game data is not revolutionary.

3. False.

Final Fantasy VII was NOT the first in the series to distance itself from the medieval fantasy setting.

most things that are considered "revolutionary" in FF7 appeared in earlier installments.

The only revolutionary aspect of FF7 was the excellent, complex storyline. That's it. I'm not saying that it's music, gameplay, characters, or graphics weren't great, but they just weren't revolutionary when compared to, lets say, FF6.

---

I don't want to start a argument but, what you stated in number 1 could've not been revolutionary for other games but revolutionary for Final Fantasy in general. All of the Final Fantasy lovers loved how the graphics got 3-D for the game and how it changed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cloud21zidane16

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hyperion4444

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

This game gets alot of criticism on this site,

---

I don't know about that.

...
Maybe it does, but you also have backers.

---

true, a lot of critism it gets in general is from people who played ff1-ff6 first, not nocking them because i am one myself:rolleyes2 but many people think ff7 is terrible because it has modern technology and things like that, Apparently it is not a traditional final fantasy,but just because ff1-ff6 came out first does not mean that it has to stick to this for ever. They tried changing it and it worked very well obviously:D

---

I think it was a step foward.
I even think they should have changed the title for a new series and continue there while having FF in medival past.
It would haved worked!

Is FFVII revolutionary? Not really, though it did bring one revolutionary thing to the series. Something only Bolivar mentioned breifly but I feel he went off track so he can rile up the FFVI fanboys;)

I'm with Goldenboko and Flying Mullet about the whole CD/3D element. At the time, it seemed inevitable that it was going to happen. Besides, if memory serves me correctly, there were several 3D RPGs on the Sega Saturn way before VII was released. Course many of them were pretty bad. So I guess it can be argued that VII was the first good 3D RPG.

Now most VII fans hate to discuss graphics as the main revolutionary aspect of the game cause we all know it's pretty shallow reason to like a game and like any fan of any game (not just VII) we like to pretend it was the more intellectually stimulating and profound aspects of the game that brought people to it and made them love it. Let's face it, we are all pretty shallow on some level.

What makes VII revolutionary not only to FF but RPG's in general, is the introduction of highly detailed pre-rendered cutscenes. It sounds shallow but hear me out. Although V and VI both pushed sprite technology and allowed players to see a greater level of depth with their characters; it can be argued that the cutscenes in VII allowed an even greater level of emotional pull. I don't believe Aerith's death would have been nearly as dramatic and inspiring if it was all done with in-game models. I don't think Sephiroth would be considered nearly as much of a badass if he didn't have the scene in the burning Nibelheim.

Many people love FF VII 's cast and story but I don't believe for a moment it's because the game is actually written better. I don't believe that Cloud is really any deeper or more meaningful as a character than Cecil or Terra. I believe that the introduction of the CG cutscenes allowed for these characters to be better presented to the players. It's one thing to watch a cute little pixelated sprite be killed, it's another to watch a 3D representation murdered up close, and watch as their eyes slink back into their heads and their body go limp as the blade pierces through them.

Graphically, VIII was a greater leap for the series than VII, story wise IV was a greater leap for the series, genre wise I and II are way more influential and groundbreaking than VII ever was.

Wow, in a short time I have so much more to say... but it's to you guys..

Starting with Mullet, we can definately agree to disagree and i agree with you 100%. Although I don't think revolutionary is relative, as it's so easy to see how similar the first six games are ESPECIALLY compared to VII. Although VI took some serious strides forward, the first six in terms of both look and gameplay appear to be practically the same game when you compare it to how much of a change VII was. I believe that clearly outlines revolutionary.

Goldenboko, I very much applaud your counter-argument, and while you absolutely picked a great scene which reminded me how much I really love VI, NOTHING SAID IN THAT SCENE IS "DEEP". Everything is on the surface, it's general and obvious statements about life that i'm sure every person across cultures would agree with, IT'S REDUNDANT!!! It serves the purpose well for an RPG, but if you want to compare the artistic credibility of writing, it's laughable that you would even suggest it.

And ah, yes. Last but not least. Ever in opposition to my ideals, as I am unwavering against his. Mr. Kanno. I knew you'd show up sooner or later to wage your never-ending crusade against the fanboys of this game.

First off, I'm going to just put it out there, you will always and predictably never give this game any unique and positive distinction over the other games because it's gained more recognition than your favorite. Plain and simple my friend. And because VIII and X were directed by Kitase, and because their scenarios were written by Nojima, and because Nomura designed their characters, you will not allow yourself to enjoy those games. But you forget that it was Kitase and Nomura (among others, but most prominently Kitase) that brought you and wrote for you your beloved FFVI!!!

Now that that's out of the way, I'll use one of your points to adress what you, Mullet, and Boko have all insisted upon: That "it's the Sony Playstation that was revolutionary moreso than the game that is made for it."


And this is my main point - it changed how games were made. All 3 of you talk about how the graphics, sound, gameplay are revolutionary for the system, not the game, and I COMPLETELY AGREE.

This is my thesis - it is how Square took these elements and used them that allowed Final Fantasy VII to change games. So far, with the CD revolution in games there were two extremes, stereotypical of two prominent systems in their history - The SegaCD (not saturn, sega's first, and possibly the first popular, attempt at a CD console) had games that were basically movies - you make a minor selection, and then a scene plays out. Lather, Rinse, Repeat. Understand that I mean this in the most literal sense, this is not like all of your criticisms of the newer final fantasies, these were REALLY interactive movies. At the other end you had the playstation, which for the most part took gameplay elements that were already in existence and were able to make really large, or really long video games.


This is why I believe VII is revolutionary - it was able to transcend both extremes masterfully and create the foundation for the modern console game. It was able to take very in-depth gameplay, the best looking movie sequences of its time, and combine them at just the right ratio in order to provide one of the best gaming experiences of all time. It was the middle ground, not to say other games didn't dance around it, but FFVII was what nailed the bull's eye, and basically gave the blueprint for how games were to be made, especially on the Sony Playstation. If you didn't have your badass cut scenes, your game was boring. If you didn't have the good gameplay, you just didn't have the game. VII created this market.

It seems like the 3 of you were arguing that Sony Playstation provided the boundaries to allow a game like FFVII to be made. But what you're all forgetting is that FFVII MADE the Playstation, and allowed Sony to succeed as a brand name. It was because of that game that it was able to go toe to toe with the giant that was Nintendo, you can point to FFVII as the exact moment that the PSX became fulfilled. That's why it's such a huge controversy today as to whether FFXIII will be multi-console or not. Am I wrong?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

Wow, in a short time I have so much more to say... but it's to you guys..

Starting with Mullet, we can definately agree to disagree and i agree with you 100%. Although I don't think revolutionary is relative, as it's so easy to see how similar the first six games are ESPECIALLY compared to VII. Although VI took some serious strides forward, the first six in terms of both look and gameplay appear to be practically the same game when you compare it to how much of a change VII was. I believe that clearly outlines revolutionary.

Goldenboko, I very much applaud your counter-argument, and while you absolutely picked a great scene which reminded me how much I really love VI, NOTHING SAID IN THAT SCENE IS "DEEP". Everything is on the surface, it's general and obvious statements about life that i'm sure every person across cultures would agree with, IT'S REDUNDANT!!! It serves the purpose well for an RPG, but if you want to compare the artistic credibility of writing, it's laughable that you would even suggest it.

And ah, yes. Last but not least. Ever in opposition to my ideals, as I am unwavering against his. Mr. Kanno. I knew you'd show up sooner or later to wage your never-ending crusade against the fanboys of this game.

First off, I'm going to just put it out there, you will always and predictably never give this game any unique and positive distinction over the other games because it's gained more recognition than your favorite. Plain and simple my friend. And because VIII and X were directed by Kitase, and because their scenarios were written by Nojima, and because Nomura designed their characters, you will not allow yourself to enjoy those games. But you forget that it was Kitase and Nomura (among others, but most prominently Kitase) that brought you and wrote for you your beloved FFVI!!!

Now that that's out of the way, I'll use one of your points to adress what you, Mullet, and Boko have all insisted upon: That "it's the Sony Playstation that was revolutionary moreso than the game that is made for it."


And this is my main point - it changed how games were made. All 3 of you talk about how the graphics, sound, gameplay are revolutionary for the system, not the game, and I COMPLETELY AGREE.

This is my thesis - it is how Square took these elements and used them that allowed Final Fantasy VII to change games. So far, with the CD revolution in games there were two extremes, stereotypical of two prominent systems in their history - The SegaCD (not saturn, sega's first, and possibly the first popular, attempt at a CD console) had games that were basically movies - you make a minor selection, and then a scene plays out. Lather, Rinse, Repeat. Understand that I mean this in the most literal sense, this is not like all of your criticisms of the newer final fantasies, these were REALLY interactive movies. At the other end you had the playstation, which for the most part took gameplay elements that were already in existence and were able to make really large, or really long video games.


This is why I believe VII is revolutionary - it was able to transcend both extremes masterfully and create the foundation for the modern console game. It was able to take very in-depth gameplay, the best looking movie sequences of its time, and combine them at just the right ratio in order to provide one of the best gaming experiences of all time. It was the middle ground, not to say other games didn't dance around it, but FFVII was what nailed the bull's eye, and basically gave the blueprint for how games were to be made, especially on the Sony Playstation. If you didn't have your badass cut scenes, your game was boring. If you didn't have the good gameplay, you just didn't have the game. VII created this market.

It seems like the 3 of you were arguing that Sony Playstation provided the boundaries to allow a game like FFVII to be made. But what you're all forgetting is that FFVII MADE the Playstation, and allowed Sony to succeed as a brand name. It was because of that game that it was able to go toe to toe with the giant that was Nintendo, you can point to FFVII as the exact moment that the PSX became fulfilled. That's why it's such a huge controversy today as to whether FFXIII will be multi-console or not. Am I wrong?

---

VERY well said. Might I also add that we're talking about the game, Final Fantasy VII. Not the Sony Playstation. I dont give a :skull::skull::skull::skull: if it was made for atari. THE GAME WAS A FIRST ON MANY LEVELS. Squaresoft decided to ditch Nintendo, and take a gamble with Sony. No, game companies didnt think they were gunna go to CD, Nintendo never wanted to abandone cartridges. Squaresoft took a gamble with Sony, and won, massivley.

Your game doesnt continue to sell 10 years later because it sucks.

But Bolivar hit the nail on the head. You guys are pissed because VII gets more recognition and attention then your SNES games.

Phew thats one mightly post there...
And crazy old me is gonna try and respond to it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

Goldenboko, I very much applaud your counter-argument, and while you absolutely picked a great scene which reminded me how much I really love VI, NOTHING SAID IN THAT SCENE IS "DEEP". Everything is on the surface, it's general and obvious statements about life that i'm sure every person across cultures would agree with, IT'S REDUNDANT!!! It serves the purpose well for an RPG, but if you want to compare the artistic credibility of writing, it's laughable that you would even suggest it.

---

General and obvious statements about life IS DEEP, depending on your definition, which is the main problem in our disagreement. We're both using deep outside of its intended use.

To me that scene was very deep, as in touching, it was moving. They discussed things that people don't want to discuss. No one tries to touch the meaning of life and death, and up to that point in video game history I've NEVER seen it attempted in a video game. Your using deep as a description of writing, which I am not.

Quote:

---

This is why I believe VII is revolutionary - it was able to transcend both extremes masterfully and create the foundation for the modern console game. It was able to take very in-depth gameplay, the best looking movie sequences of its time, and combine them at just the right ratio in order to provide one of the best gaming experiences of all time. It was the middle ground, not to say other games didn't dance around it, but FFVII was what nailed the bull's eye, and basically gave the blueprint for how games were to be made, especially on the Sony Playstation. If you didn't have your badass cut scenes, your game was boring. If you didn't have the good gameplay, you just didn't have the game. VII created this market.

---

What about Resident Evil? It was published about the same time, and it also was pushing graphics at the time, it was pushing gameplay. FFVII deserves credit but this much is just ridiculous.

Also you stated the difference between the first six wasn't much....
I'd like to ask you something how similar do these look?

Original FFI
http://www.ffsky.com/ff/pictures/%2F...g/ff2nes-1.gif
http://www.finalfantasytr.com/ff4/bo...eromus27zm.gif
Orignal FFII (our FFIV was original FFII)

Not much huh?

FFs have pushed the bar so much, so often, you could argue ALL of them where revolutionary. But few where, FFI was, definitely, but IMO thats all the rest just raised the bar.


Also there appear to be very personal jabs in your post. FFVI is not my favorite FF. FFIX is. I don't care how many fans each FF has, I have my personal opinions. I don't care who wrote it, actually I don't really even know.

EDIT- So big theres a whole new post before I'm done.

grim you take this whole argument far too personally, I'm going to tell you the same thing I told Bolviar, my favorite game isn't even one from NES. And all of the games have sold continually since there release, even FFX-2, so thats not saying much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by That rambly fan boy over there

Your game doesnt continue to sell 10 years later because it sucks.

---

Personally I havn't seen a copy of FFVII being sold in stores -years-, the reason that people are still playing it now are because of family and friends who have given the younger kids the games. Heck, My neices who are two and eight both know who mario is and the eight year old has played the old super marios AND the old Zeldas because she was shown the games by her mother. Granted Vintage stores have it but they also have pong, frogger, and Sega Saturn games for like 3 bucks, but if you look at it the vintage store way, My sister bought a copy of Link to the Past at one of those places once and they sure as heck don't sell that anymore.
If my sister had played FFVII (which she didn't she's the Zelda person in this house) she prolly would have given her copy to her daughter or let her daughters friends play it.

Oh and by the way, there are some -really- bad games that are sell. Just 'cause they sell doesn't mean they're good, I can't count the number of bad games I've bought and ironically enough it could be the best game ever. I look at is as a bad game, the companies look at it as one more game sold, one more game to the step of video fame. :rolleyes2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

And ah, yes. Last but not least. Ever in opposition to my ideals, as I am unwavering against his. Mr. Kanno. I knew you'd show up sooner or later to wage your never-ending crusade against the fanboys of this game.

First off, I'm going to just put it out there, you will always and predictably never give this game any unique and positive distinction over the other games because it's gained more recognition than your favorite. Plain and simple my friend. And because VIII and X were directed by Kitase, and because their scenarios were written by Nojima, and because Nomura designed their characters, you will not allow yourself to enjoy those games. But you forget that it was Kitase and Nomura (among others, but most prominently Kitase) that brought you and wrote for you your beloved FFVI!!!

---

I'll of course always be here to disagree with you but it's far more entertaining this way don't you agree?;)

As for my never ending war against all things Kitase, Nojima, and Nomura. It's true, I do feel these three are slowly killing off a good franchise. Oddly enough I feel VII is the best game this team has done and I wish they would do more like it. I thought X would be that type of game but I was horribly mistaken. XIII is looking the same but I've been burned too many times to be cautiously optimistic. I choose to be skeptical cause at least then I won't be disappointed. :p I wish Nomura would stick to his more anime inspired designs, I don't really hate Kitase except for his overuse of action and some of his more dramatic scenes come off cheesy but that happens even to the best. Nojima is the M. Night Shyamalan of video game writing. His plots start off interesting but his incessant use of quirky (and sometimes predictable) plot twists in a sad attempt to make his games appear deeper than they really are make it difficult for me to like his games he writes for. VII is the deepest game he has worked on but VII had three other writers working on it and judging by the others he worked on, I can see the more profound parts of VII were not his ideas.

I appreciate the teams efforts to try and reinvent the genre and to redefine what fantasy is but for me they still have failed to live up to this lofty expectation. VII has come the closest for me.

But you mistake my feelings for VII as blind jealousy. VI is written as my favorite on my profile cause it will always be my favorite from a nostalgic sentimentality. That hardly means I feel VI is perfect or the quintessential FF game in the series. To be honest, if we are talking about which FF is perfect in all aspects of graphics, gameplay, storytelling and world design; my vote would actually go to FF Tactics. It's still deeper and more well thought out than any game in the main series IMHO.

Now you mistake my sentiments about FFVII as blind fanboy jealousy but it can equally be argued that your thoughts about the other games in the series in comparison to your beloved VII is the same thing. You just can't let any other game be better than it or be told that it did it first. So your point is moot. I don't hate VII, is it overrated? hell yes but I would even throw in my beloved VI as overrated. I can see that VI isn't perfect can you for VII?

Now if I had not been a die hard anime fan, or been well acquainted with Secret of Mana and Chrono Trigger. I can see where VII's plot and characters could have been mind blowing to you. Regretfully I was well versed in all these and so VII offered nothing new in terms of story or depth. Granted had I been well versed in these things before playing VI I would be saying the same thing about it from a literary standpoint. My anger in the series goes solely to X but that's cause the game bored me to tears and offered nothing I can see to be meaningful. I actually liked VII and I like VIII as well.

Hopefully this has all been insightful for you.

Quote:

---

And this is my main point - it changed how games were made. All 3 of you talk about how the graphics, sound, gameplay are revolutionary for the system, not the game, and I COMPLETELY AGREE.

This is my thesis - it is how Square took these elements and used them that allowed Final Fantasy VII to change games. So far, with the CD revolution in games there were two extremes, stereotypical of two prominent systems in their history - The SegaCD (not saturn, sega's first, and possibly the first popular, attempt at a CD console) had games that were basically movies - you make a minor selection, and then a scene plays out. Lather, Rinse, Repeat. Understand that I mean this in the most literal sense, this is not like all of your criticisms of the newer final fantasies, these were REALLY interactive movies. At the other end you had the playstation, which for the most part took gameplay elements that were already in existence and were able to make really large, or really long video games.


This is why I believe VII is revolutionary - it was able to transcend both extremes masterfully and create the foundation for the modern console game. It was able to take very in-depth gameplay, the best looking movie sequences of its time, and combine them at just the right ratio in order to provide one of the best gaming experiences of all time. It was the middle ground, not to say other games didn't dance around it, but FFVII was what nailed the bull's eye, and basically gave the blueprint for how games were to be made, especially on the Sony Playstation. If you didn't have your badass cut scenes, your game was boring. If you didn't have the good gameplay, you just didn't have the game. VII created this market.

---

Now, now, you are seriously downplaying the Saturn and what it offered. I'll admit that the 3D games for this system left something to be desired but many were actually good. I'll admit that it was purely Square that made VII wonderful through the power of the Playstaion but as Goldenboko has pointed out you treat it as though Square has never done this before. FFIII practically looks like an SNES game at times and the sprite details in VI and CT are still barely rivaled today in standards. Square has always pushed the technological boundaries of the systems they work for. Only Square and Kojima's team in Konami can truly make a system stand up and do tricks. The technology allowed them to make it 3D finally. Technically VI (in a very roundabout way) was first to be turned to 3D.

I'll agree that VII set a standard for RPGs but I feel you fail to see that FFII and FFIV did it as well. The FF series as a whole has always been a trendsetter regardless whether polpular opinion felt so. I don't feel that VII has set a standard that hasn't been surpassed to this day. Just about every FF after the game set the bar for RPGs. The only things I can see VII truly revolutionizing was the introduction of cutscenes (which did become standard after it was realeased) and that due to its amazing visuals and wonderful gameplay, opened up the RPG genre to a wider audiance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

VERY well said. Might I also add that we're talking about the game, Final Fantasy VII. Not the Sony Playstation. I dont give a :skull::skull::skull::skull: if it was made for atari. THE GAME WAS A FIRST ON MANY LEVELS. Squaresoft decided to ditch Nintendo, and take a gamble with Sony. No, game companies didnt think they were gunna go to CD, Nintendo never wanted to abandone cartridges. Squaresoft took a gamble with Sony, and won, massivley.

Your game doesnt continue to sell 10 years later because it sucks.

But Bolivar hit the nail on the head. You guys are pissed because VII gets more recognition and attention then your SNES games.

---

You fail to remember that Nintendo was the only comapny resistant to moving onto CD format. The transition was inevitable, and most of the industry saw it. That was why the 64 did poorly. They lost all their 3rd party support because as we all know Nintendo makes :skull::skull::skull::skull:ty buisness decisions:rolleyes2 .

You act like VII was the first CD based 3D game. Wild ARMS was the first to use 3D sprites and their were quite a few CD based RPGs on the Saturn. Bolivar makes a better point in saying that VII was the first to do it well.

It's all up to personal opinion whether FF7 revolutionised the series. I personally think it revolutionised it as much as FF1-FF6 did... and you can't say I'm just sticking up for my favourite RPGs with that comment, because FF7 is my favourite.
But FF1 started the series. If that isn't revolutionary, I don't know what is.:D
FF2 had a totally different storyline and leveling system. I don't know about RPGs in those days, but sequels usually have the same characters and things in it as the previous game, but FF2 had completely new characters and even a new world map. I think that's pretty revolutionary. It killed off a number of characters, including one that I loved to bits ((SPOILER)Minwu), so I think that was a revolutionary touch too.
FF3 had a job system. And it introduced us to summons!:love:
FF4 introduced a new depth to character development and storyline.
FF5 had a new-improved job system, which I suppose isn't very revolutionary, but it's worth mentioning. It started a trend of flying to a corner of the world map to get something (in world two you have to fly into one of the corners to get Shoat), which you can also see later in FF7 and FF8.
FF6 let us have the flexibility of changing our party's characters when we felt like it (unless, of course, you had to use that character for storyline reasons), not to mention a brilliant story and the best villian ever (IMO). Secret characters were also introduced, which I thought was awesome. Not to mention it pushed the boundaries of graphics, and I still think those graphics are great, despite newer games today that are all about how the game looks.
FF7 had a starting FMV that would have blown me away had I not been about five years old when I saw it. But FMVs WERE revolutionary. I think the graphics (especially FMV and background graphics) were revolutionary in a way too, because they could have easily made a 2d FF on the Playstation, but instead they took advantage of the Playstation's capabilities and made it 3d. I suppose one COULD say that was because of Sony, however.

Phew... that'll do for now. Just my two cents.:)

Whew, there's too many discussions here to keep up anymore, but it's good to see 90% of it is quality debate. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

Might I also add that we're talking about the game, Final Fantasy VII. Not the Sony Playstation. I dont give a :skull::skull::skull::skull: if it was made for atari.

---

Sorry, but when you're having a debate, you have to consider all aspects of the topic, not just the ones that support your claims. Therefore, you have to discuss how much of the "revolution" should be attributed to the Playstation and how much should be attributed to FFVII.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

Squaresoft decided to ditch Nintendo, and take a gamble with Sony. No, game companies didnt think they were gunna go to CD, Nintendo never wanted to abandone cartridges. Squaresoft took a gamble with Sony, and won, massivley.

---

This statement is partially correct. No, Square didn't want to abandon cartridges and Nintendo "just because", but it was impossible for them to fit a game the size of FFVII on the N64's cartridge. Thus they moved to the Playstation because they had the option to put larger games on multiple disks. Plus, producing/manufacturing the games on CD is much cheaper than cartridges, which is in general one of the major reasons why the Playstion stomped the N64, because developers wanted a system that was cheaper to release games on. So there was no gamble on Square's part, it was a nessecity from a game development and fiscal/business view.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

Your game doesnt continue to sell 10 years later because it sucks.

---

As has been said before, FFVII doesn't continue to sell either. None of the older games would continue to sell except they've re-released the older games on other systems, so we can't discuss/argue this point as there is no way to validate either side of the argument or claim.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

But Bolivar hit the nail on the head. You guys are pissed because VII gets more recognition and attention then your SNES games.

---

No, we're not. I'm not as naive as others in this thread to believe that everyone loves my game and should completely agree with me. If you haven't noticed, a lot of us have either agreed or conceeded points or parts of the argument to Bolivar because he has sound justification for his views. You, on the other hand, just randomly throw out ideas and get mad at us when we disagree with you. What we're pissed about is you are being a "sterotypical FFVII fanboy" and refuse to back your claims up, resorting to lashing out at the others in this thread when they disagree with you on any aspect of your opinions on FFVII, rather than providing evidence for your claims.

Im not getting mad at all. You people fail to see what revolutionary means. You sit there and say "FF VII isnt revolutionary."

And then turn around and say "Oh, well, it DID do this, it was ONLY revolutionary cuz it did this."

I dont care if someone gets their point across better then me. FFVII continues to sell very well on the internet. Most people already have it, but those who dont snatch it up. Hardly anyone I know owns VI on the SNES.

Most of this debate is a matter of opinion. Also, you guys are missing my entire point. What I originally said was that Final Fantasy I-VI revolutionized RPG games in general. Final Fantasy VII revolutionized the series. Instead of addressing that, you people are talking about how I-VI revolutionized RPG's, which I ALREADY SAID THEY DID.

Then you all go on to ADMIT that VII raised the bar, set standards, and offered new things to the franchise. You ADMIT it was revolutionary. I dont care how small the revolutionary act was, it was STILL revolutionary, which proves my entire point.

We can argue all day about how VI was revolutionary, V was, IV was, and so on. And they were in their own right. BUT SO WAS VII. And you all admit it. Which was my point.

Your problem is you don't read/listen to what WE say. I've read your argument several times. And proved several things you don't listen to.

I'm saying VII isn't the only FF that still sells well on the internet. I type in Final Fantasy in eBay what do I get This. Not only FFVII is there, but Anthology is there (V, and VI), VII is there, XII is there. Besides selling well has NOTHING to do revolutionary. VIII sold well, it was, in no way revolutionary. IX sold well, it was just a TRIBUTE to the past ones, not revolutionary.

And your saying "their all revolutionary blah blah blah, that includes FFVII"

If you read what I said, I said FFI was revolutionary, it started it all, none of the others were.

Now perhaps if you READ my POST, then we can make PROGRESS, like whats suppose to happen in DEBATES.

I don't want to get involved in this, but I think it is understood that the system comes into account when you are talking about what a game did technologically. I don't think it needs to be said or really debated, you just can't seperate the two.

.02

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

FFVII continues to sell very well on the internet. Most people already have it, but those who dont snatch it up. Hardly anyone I know owns VI on the SNES.

---

That's because of the availability of a platform to play the game on, not because of the popularity of the game. Most people don't have a SNES to play the older games on and they can play FFVII on their PS2 or PS3.

Wow, still alot of stuff goin on here, like Mullet said, 90% of it is pretty damn good, one of the best debates i've seen in the FF game forums in a minute...

First I just wanna clear somethin up

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno

Now you mistake my sentiments about FFVII as blind fanboy jealousy but it can equally be argued that your thoughts about the other games in the series in comparison to your beloved VII is the same thing. You just can't let any other game be better than it or be told that it did it first. So your point is moot. I don't hate VII, is it overrated? hell yes but I would even throw in my beloved VI as overrated. I can see that VI isn't perfect can you for VII?

---

Nah man, please don't misinterpret me as saying those things. I don't consider you, Mullet, Avarice, Boko, (well, I think Boko's had alot of negative influence) as being fanboys, because you all come in here and give solid reasons for your beliefs. But I think there's a little bias in there, just like i'll gladly admit that I have alot of bias in that this game really changed my view on games, and raised the bar for what it takes for a game to satisfy me. But my point is, please, don't think i'm downplaying your arguments to jelous or fanboyism, i really think this is a great debate.

First off, Kanno, you mistook what I said, my whole "history of the CD console" was NOT about Sega Saturn, it was about the SEGA CD. It was an add on to the Sega Genesis, and like I said, it was the first, or the first mainstream attempt at a disc-based console system. If you go back and look at those games, they TRULY WERE interactive movies,were you make really small decisions in an almost text-based format and then a mini movie will play until you make your next choice. This was one of the first ways in which game developers tackled the possibilities of disc games.

My point should follow, that squaresoft looked at this strategy, then looked at PSX games, which were mostly either large or long games w/ few or manditory cut scenes, FFVII used both at just the right porportions and gave birth to the modern video game. THAT'S REVOLUTIONARY. Do you disagree?

Resident Evil is a great example, but for the most part, it follows what i was saying for PSX games. It was basically following the same principle as Doom, except it was 3rd person. There were very small rooms, so even though it was pushing the boundaries of games, it was still very much confined within the same traditional mindset of game developers pre-FFVII.

Also, once again, I have to say that comparing how revolutionary the previous FF games were to FFVII is unplausible and rediculous. If you take all the first 6 FF's together in one group and compare them to VII, you'll see that the differences between those games, although they seemed great at the time, are extremely miniscule compared to the differences to VII. In that sense, FFI is less revolutionary than FFVII because you can throw DragonQuest and the other NES RPG's into that category and still see that the differences between those games and VII is still massive whereas in comparison the differences among them are like baby steps. The word REVOLUTIONARY implies change, drastic change, and it's hard to argue that VII didn't provide that.

Goldenboko, about our argument on deep, I agree with what you're saying 100%, FFVI is is a very emotionally moving game. I'm a young man, but I'm not afraid to admit that there are a few FF's that made me cry/want to cry, and VI is one of those games. But My whole point about the the writing and the deepness of it is to illustrate the REVOLUTIONARY change that it provided. Social Commentary is something that was absent from video games, at least in the popular sphere, especially dealing with it philosophically and eruditely (is this a word?) like FFVII did, so I consider that to be VERY revolutionary. VI also (and i realize that this is not your favorite) dealt with many issues, but I think it was VII that brought them to the forefront because it dealt with so many different things, environmental issues, the effects of science and technology, militarism, nationalism, capitalism, cultural conflict and resistance, and while VI and previous games may have touched on these things, they were only able to do just that - touch on them. VII brought them to the forefront and added an artistic credibility that isn't present in previous games and THAT'S REVOLUTIONARY.

There's more to say, but I would address Kanno again, the key here is change, and you say that IV and II also set the bar for RPG's, but how drastic is that compared to VII? After Final Fantasy VII I witnessed entire sub-genres of RPG's die out. Before that game there were many different systems and battle systems that RPG's employed, but after this the genre almost became synonymous for menu-command and turn-based battle, in one way or another, many RPGs that follow emulating FFVII's ATB system. Strategy RPGs were my favorite kind of RPG due to everything that was built in to them, and after FFVII, I saw this artform completely disappear off the market. Except for Final Fantasy Tactics, which to me was the last hurrah for the sub-genre, and I would agree with you in many ways when you said that FFT is probably the best work in the series, but that's another debate.

I have 9 minutes to eat lunch before my next class so i gotta jet, i'll check up on this later.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flying Mullet

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

FFVII continues to sell very well on the internet. Most people already have it, but those who dont snatch it up. Hardly anyone I know owns VI on the SNES.

---

That's because of the availability of a platform to play the game on, not because of the popularity of the game. Most people don't have a SNES to play the older games on and they can play FFVII on their PS2 or PS3.

---

I do~ and so do three of my friends from Texas, AND we have an SNES in this house, and one at my mothers. And the internet shouldn't count as a way to back up your selling, Just because things sell good on the internet doesn't mean they're actually great.

My uncle sold a pair of his 5 year old USED -DIRTY- tennis shoes, and people bought them, knowing that they were used, dirty old tennis shoes, why the bought them, no one knows, but if you look at it that way, then for all we know used dirty old tennis shoes are all the rage after being worn out for 5 years and that's just idiotic.

Not to mention, arn't most of the older psx games sold as used or were already bought and sold as being in mint condition? If I remember correctly, that would mean that in business terms for Sony and Square, there is no actual 'sale' happening because all it is, is one person buying the game, making a sale for Sony and Square, then being the medium and re-selling it so someone else. In the terms of games sold, it's only been sold once, because the games only been bought from a liscened dealer once. So unless they're still producing the game (which if they were they'd be on shelves at stores) then all these 'sells' have -no- relevance to Sony and Square but the random third-party people selling them.

I buy my copy of FFVII from a liscened dealer (places like wal-mart, gamestop and what not),then I sell it to you, then I buy it back, then I sell it to another person, then I buy it back, then I could sell it to another and buy it back, and that DOES NOT the game has sold 7 times, Speaking for the company itself and in actual terms of 'it's still selling' it's only been sold -once-. Once the company is able to lose track of where the games are selling at, or are no longer producing the games, the game is just like -any other- thing sold on the internet.



So -no- I don't believe you can count the internet for that, unless you wanna call all the things sold on the internet as great as FFVII, which I really don't consider used dirty old tennis shoes to be one of them. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The rambly one

There's more to say, but I would address Kanno again, the key here is change, and you say that IV and II also set the bar for RPG's, but how drastic is that compared to VII? After Final Fantasy VII I witnessed entire sub-genres of RPG's die out. Before that game there were many different systems and battle systems that RPG's employed, but after this the genre almost became synonymous for menu-command and turn-based battle, in one way or another, many RPGs that follow emulating FFVII's ATB system.

---

... Wait.. The only thing that's different is the limit breaks.
The only reason I was able to play FFVII battle system is because IT'S BASICALLY THE EXACT SAME AS FFVI, which is what I played when I was 9, so no, I don't agree in -any- sense that FFVII's battle system was revolutionary, because I don't consider a limit break revolutionary, it's basically like in Zeldas Link to the Past (SNES PLEASE) when you can hold down the button and he starts getting all glowy then can flash around! Or even in Final Fantasy Adventure AKA SEIKEN DENSETSU (Made in 1991 by the way) there's an.. OMG LIMIT BARRR?!?!?!?!? Yeah, and once it fills up, you get to do this awesome thing.. that... IS ALOT LIKE A LIMIT BREAK. Release all your power onto the enemy. So no, in reality, EVERY element in the ATB system has been used at some point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Avarice-ness

I do~ and so do three of my friends from Texas, AND we have an SNES in this house, and one at my mothers.

---

As do I. *high-fives Avarice-ness*

I think the main way the game revolutionised the series was by introducing it to a wider audience. To my knowledge, none of the previous Final Fantasy games actually got a European release (Wikipedia certainly doesn't give any release dates for European versions of FFI, FFIV and FFVI). In a way, I'd say the game revolutionised how people viewed RPGs and the audience itself to as large (if not larger) extent than the series itself. Though FFVII has, obviously had some noticeable effects upon the Final Fantasy series itself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Avarice-ness

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The rambly one

There's more to say, but I would address Kanno again, the key here is change, and you say that IV and II also set the bar for RPG's, but how drastic is that compared to VII? After Final Fantasy VII I witnessed entire sub-genres of RPG's die out. Before that game there were many different systems and battle systems that RPG's employed, but after this the genre almost became synonymous for menu-command and turn-based battle, in one way or another, many RPGs that follow emulating FFVII's ATB system.

---

... Wait.. The only thing that's different is the limit breaks.
The only reason I was able to play FFVII battle system is because IT'S BASICALLY THE EXACT SAME AS FFVI, which is what I played when I was 9, so no, I don't agree in -any- sense that FFVII's battle system was revolutionary, because I don't consider a limit break revolutionary, it's basically like in Zeldas Link to the Past (SNES PLEASE) when you can hold down the button and he starts getting all glowy then can flash around! Or even in Final Fantasy Adventure AKA SEIKEN DENSETSU (Made in 1991 by the way) there's an.. OMG LIMIT BARRR?!?!?!?!? Yeah, and once it fills up, you get to do this awesome thing.. that... IS ALOT LIKE A LIMIT BREAK. Release all your power onto the enemy. So no, in reality, EVERY element in the ATB system has been used at some point.

---

LOL, 1st, thanks for calling me "The rambly one", 2nd, you completely misinterpret me and ramble on yourself about limit breaks. I never said its battle system was revolutionary. I'm trying to prove VII was revolutionary, defined as bringing about drastic change, and the entire point of that paragraph, which you fail to adress, is that after VII, many different sub-genres of RPG's died out, including my favorite type of game - The Strategy RPG, whereas the turn based battles now almost became synonimous (sp?) with RPGs and dominated the scene. To avoid rambling, that is all, i'll let you reread my post, it's explained there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Avarice-ness

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The rambly one

There's more to say, but I would address Kanno again, the key here is change, and you say that IV and II also set the bar for RPG's, but how drastic is that compared to VII? After Final Fantasy VII I witnessed entire sub-genres of RPG's die out. Before that game there were many different systems and battle systems that RPG's employed, but after this the genre almost became synonymous for menu-command and turn-based battle, in one way or another, many RPGs that follow emulating FFVII's ATB system.

---

... Wait.. The only thing that's different is the limit breaks.
The only reason I was able to play FFVII battle system is because IT'S BASICALLY THE EXACT SAME AS FFVI, which is what I played when I was 9, so no, I don't agree in -any- sense that FFVII's battle system was revolutionary, because I don't consider a limit break revolutionary, it's basically like in Zeldas Link to the Past (SNES PLEASE) when you can hold down the button and he starts getting all glowy then can flash around! Or even in Final Fantasy Adventure AKA SEIKEN DENSETSU (Made in 1991 by the way) there's an.. OMG LIMIT BARRR?!?!?!?!? Yeah, and once it fills up, you get to do this awesome thing.. that... IS ALOT LIKE A LIMIT BREAK. Release all your power onto the enemy. So no, in reality, EVERY element in the ATB system has been used at some point.

---

LOL, 1st, thanks for calling me "The rambly one", 2nd, you completely misinterpret me and ramble on yourself about limit breaks. I never said its battle system was revolutionary. I'm trying to prove VII was revolutionary, defined as bringing about drastic change, and the entire point of that paragraph, which you fail to adress, is that after VII, many different sub-genres of RPG's died out, including my favorite type of game - The Strategy RPG, whereas the turn based battles now almost became synonimous (sp?) with RPGs and dominated the scene. To avoid rambling, that is all, i'll let you reread my post, it's explained there.

---

1st, I ramble that's no surprise to anyone so pointing out that I ramble is like pointing out the sky is blue on a sunny day.
Oh, whoops. I guess I wouldn't consider that a change because I didn't even care about Strategy RPG's let alone knew they even existed until like 3 years ago, which is ironically after FFVII.
2nd. Real time > Turn Based > Strategy rpg.
3rd. Just because Strategy RPG's started to get phased out at the same time of FFVII's release doesn't mean that FFVII was the cause of that. Some game genre's just fall off the radar due to the popularity of other genres, and FFVII is not a genre. It's like you don't see many just -plain- race car games, you see ones that you have to cause some kind of damage to get further, where as 10 years ago, there were -straight up- race car games, you get on the road and you race, you don't have to cause destruction to win. It's because the added destruction to race car games is apparently more fun than -normal- race car games, so the old 'just get on the road and race' games are now off the radar.
Companies make games that can get as close to the most popular genre, I don't believe that FFVII singlehandedly brought the start of the downfall of your games, but I do believe it may have came out at the time that the popularity of strategy games started to decline.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flying Mullet

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Avarice-ness

I do~ and so do three of my friends from Texas, AND we have an SNES in this house, and one at my mothers.

---

As do I. *high-fives Avarice-ness*

---

*high-fives le Mullet* :D

My god.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by That dude

Also, once again, I have to say that comparing how revolutionary the previous FF games were to FFVII is unplausible and rediculous. If you take all the first 6 FF's together in one group and compare them to VII, you'll see that the differences between those games, although they seemed great at the time, are extremely miniscule compared to the differences to VII. In that sense, FFI is less revolutionary than FFVII because you can throw DragonQuest and the other NES RPG's into that category and still see that the differences between those games and VII is still massive whereas in comparison the differences among them are like baby steps. The word REVOLUTIONARY implies change, drastic change, and it's hard to argue that VII didn't provide that.

---

The reason people are backing up every other game is due to your lack of evidence and your over use of opinion words. I don't think that anyone will agree with you, which you did say EVERYONE will agree with you, until you're actually able to throw up some evidence that game was this revolutionary, which means the evidence can be proven (Facts AKA 100% true, statistics, etc..) you're going to continue to be called an FFVII fan-boy.

I like VI and VII. VII was not revolutionary, unless you count the game being played out by popeye the sailor man, with those big bulge forearms. When I first turned on the game, I seen cloud and wondered how much uhm.. "pole vaulting" he must be guilty of. Then I seen how he reacted to Tifa and her assets, and well -- I understood.

Either way, VII was alright, but it is where the series starts diving like a special Olympic gymnast. Flopping all the way. Come to think of ti, I really don't like VII all that much. humph.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Avarice-ness

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Avarice-ness

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The rambly one

There's more to say, but I would address Kanno again, the key here is change, and you say that IV and II also set the bar for RPG's, but how drastic is that compared to VII? After Final Fantasy VII I witnessed entire sub-genres of RPG's die out. Before that game there were many different systems and battle systems that RPG's employed, but after this the genre almost became synonymous for menu-command and turn-based battle, in one way or another, many RPGs that follow emulating FFVII's ATB system.

---

... Wait.. The only thing that's different is the limit breaks.
The only reason I was able to play FFVII battle system is because IT'S BASICALLY THE EXACT SAME AS FFVI, which is what I played when I was 9, so no, I don't agree in -any- sense that FFVII's battle system was revolutionary, because I don't consider a limit break revolutionary, it's basically like in Zeldas Link to the Past (SNES PLEASE) when you can hold down the button and he starts getting all glowy then can flash around! Or even in Final Fantasy Adventure AKA SEIKEN DENSETSU (Made in 1991 by the way) there's an.. OMG LIMIT BARRR?!?!?!?!? Yeah, and once it fills up, you get to do this awesome thing.. that... IS ALOT LIKE A LIMIT BREAK. Release all your power onto the enemy. So no, in reality, EVERY element in the ATB system has been used at some point.

---

LOL, 1st, thanks for calling me "The rambly one", 2nd, you completely misinterpret me and ramble on yourself about limit breaks. I never said its battle system was revolutionary. I'm trying to prove VII was revolutionary, defined as bringing about drastic change, and the entire point of that paragraph, which you fail to adress, is that after VII, many different sub-genres of RPG's died out, including my favorite type of game - The Strategy RPG, whereas the turn based battles now almost became synonimous (sp?) with RPGs and dominated the scene. To avoid rambling, that is all, i'll let you reread my post, it's explained there.

---

1st, I ramble that's no surprise to anyone so pointing out that I ramble is like pointing out the sky is blue on a sunny day.
Oh, whoops. I guess I wouldn't consider that a change because I didn't even care about Strategy RPG's let alone knew they even existed until like 3 years ago, which is ironically after FFVII.
2nd. Real time > Turn Based > Strategy rpg.
3rd. Just because Strategy RPG's started to get phased out at the same time of FFVII's release doesn't mean that FFVII was the cause of that. Some game genre's just fall off the radar due to the popularity of other genres, and FFVII is not a genre. It's like you don't see many just -plain- race car games, you see ones that you have to cause some kind of damage to get further, where as 10 years ago, there were -straight up- race car games, you get on the road and you race, you don't have to cause destruction to win. It's because the added destruction to race car games is apparently more fun than -normal- race car games, so the old 'just get on the road and race' games are now off the radar.
Companies make games that can get as close to the most popular genre, I don't believe that FFVII singlehandedly brought the start of the downfall of your games, but I do believe it may have came out at the time that the popularity of strategy games started to decline.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flying Mullet

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Avarice-ness

I do~ and so do three of my friends from Texas, AND we have an SNES in this house, and one at my mothers.

---

As do I. *high-fives Avarice-ness*

---

*high-fives le Mullet* :D

My god.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by That dude

Also, once again, I have to say that comparing how revolutionary the previous FF games were to FFVII is unplausible and rediculous. If you take all the first 6 FF's together in one group and compare them to VII, you'll see that the differences between those games, although they seemed great at the time, are extremely miniscule compared to the differences to VII. In that sense, FFI is less revolutionary than FFVII because you can throw DragonQuest and the other NES RPG's into that category and still see that the differences between those games and VII is still massive whereas in comparison the differences among them are like baby steps. The word REVOLUTIONARY implies change, drastic change, and it's hard to argue that VII didn't provide that.

---

The reason people are backing up every other game is due to your lack of evidence and your over use of opinion words. I don't think that anyone will agree with you, which you did say EVERYONE will agree with you, until you're actually able to throw up some evidence that game was this revolutionary, which means the evidence can be proven (Facts AKA 100% true, statistics, etc..) you're going to continue to be called an FFVII fan-boy.

---

LOL pt. II, once again you ignore most of my major points in order to find any errors to point out, which most of the time are false themselves. No one will agree with me? Mullet and others already have.

My original point about strategy rpgs is that there was a large variety of RPGs before FFVII, but afterwards turn-based, or real-time turn based ala ATB was the most emulated system, and along with menu commands, became synonymous with the genre. We could debate all day until we're blue in the face about if it was really VII that influenced the market, but the evidence for that is tricky, I believe the popularity of the game should suffice.

Also, you're the first one to call me an FFVII fanboy. I find it amusing that you accuse me of having no evidence and using opinions yet you fail to challenge my points or the evidence I provided for them. So far I have backed up my beliefs with justifications, if you don't believe me, ask our good friend:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flying Mullet

Bolivar, I find it hard to disagree with your statements. They're eloquent and you provide good evidence.

---

I mean you just quoted one of my points and fail to say anything about it other than "you have no evidence, only opinions, you're a fanboy, etc." Let me simplify it for you and tell me what you think:

Statement: The differences among the first six FF's are much much smaller than their differences with Final Fantasy VII.

Do you agree or disagree?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

What I originally said was that Final Fantasy I-VI revolutionized RPG games in general. Final Fantasy VII revolutionized the series.

---

To be completely technical, what you originally said was:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

Yeah, I mean it only brought FF to the mainstream, catapaulted the Playstations sales, put Sony on the map, put Square on the map, had pretty much the most interesting story, STILL, 10 years after its release. People STILL play it, games and movies are being based off of it.

But damn, VI musta been alot better huh...

---

And since that point everything has snowballed into the current situation, with people on both sides making good points.

You may all continue with the ripping out of each other's throats.

Wow, this is amazing. This is one of the most organised debates of "SNESfanboyism vs. VIIfanboyism" i've ever seen in this thread. And the fact that everyone is actually carmly ripping other people's posts up instead of the 'virtually' big arguments of "I/II/IIIetc is much better the that bastard of a game VII you stupid fanboy" has almost been unheard of before now.

Keep it up guys, i'm enjoying the debate.

(ps. Please don't comment on this post, it's just a complement to almost all of you).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

Wow, still alot of stuff goin on here, like Mullet said, 90% of it is pretty damn good, one of the best debates i've seen in the FF game forums in a minute...

First I just wanna clear somethin up

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno

Now you mistake my sentiments about FFVII as blind fanboy jealousy but it can equally be argued that your thoughts about the other games in the series in comparison to your beloved VII is the same thing. You just can't let any other game be better than it or be told that it did it first. So your point is moot. I don't hate VII, is it overrated? hell yes but I would even throw in my beloved VI as overrated. I can see that VI isn't perfect can you for VII?

---

Nah man, please don't misinterpret me as saying those things. I don't consider you, Mullet, Avarice, Boko, (well, I think Boko's had alot of negative influence) as being fanboys, because you all come in here and give solid reasons for your beliefs. But I think there's a little bias in there, just like i'll gladly admit that I have alot of bias in that this game really changed my view on games, and raised the bar for what it takes for a game to satisfy me. But my point is, please, don't think i'm downplaying your arguments to jelous or fanboyism, i really think this is a great debate.

---

Same here actually I just wanted to make this all clear;) I just needed to make sure that I wasn't debating with the usual VII fans. It's rare to have a good logical argument with someone who has a genuine and logical love for something.

Quote:

---

First off, Kanno, you mistook what I said, my whole "history of the CD console" was NOT about Sega Saturn, it was about the SEGA CD. It was an add on to the Sega Genesis, and like I said, it was the first, or the first mainstream attempt at a disc-based console system. If you go back and look at those games, they TRULY WERE interactive movies,were you make really small decisions in an almost text-based format and then a mini movie will play until you make your next choice. This was one of the first ways in which game developers tackled the possibilities of disc games.

My point should follow, that squaresoft looked at this strategy, then looked at PSX games, which were mostly either large or long games w/ few or manditory cut scenes, FFVII used both at just the right porportions and gave birth to the modern video game. THAT'S REVOLUTIONARY. Do you disagree?

---

I don't disagree that the Sega CD brought out this phenomenon of pacing, but it can be argued that all storybased RPGs even dating back to the NES days followed this format. Replace movie scenes with ingame sprites moving with text playing and you get the same phenomenon. As I stated before (and this I believe we can both agree on) is that cutscenes were created in order to make a much more dramatic and dynamic basis to tell a compelling story. Both VI and CT could be cited as early experiments to this eventual conclusion.

On a technological front, I can agree that VII did alot for the series.

Quote:

---

Also, once again, I have to say that comparing how revolutionary the previous FF games were to FFVII is unplausible and rediculous. If you take all the first 6 FF's together in one group and compare them to VII, you'll see that the differences between those games, although they seemed great at the time, are extremely miniscule compared to the differences to VII. In that sense, FFI is less revolutionary than FFVII because you can throw DragonQuest and the other NES RPG's into that category and still see that the differences between those games and VII is still massive whereas in comparison the differences among them are like baby steps. The word REVOLUTIONARY implies change, drastic change, and it's hard to argue that VII didn't provide that.

---

Whoa there, I feel you are seriously downplaying the series and failing to see that VII is nothing more than an accumilation of many games before it rather than some intellectual leap in thinking. Personally if IV and VI were redesigned with the same level of technology; one could easily see that the games are easily on equal standing.

You fail to remember that the previous games suffer from technology limitaions and yet their abilty to remain endearing after so much has come after them is truly a wonderful testament to the quality of these games. VII also has these qualities even though much better things have come since it's release. Its not just simple nostalgia or sentimentailty that makes them endearing, these games were well designed and many of them touched us in a way that we never felt possible.

I can tell you the moment that VI became more than just a "good RPG" to me, the first time I played through the opera scene, I stopped and asked myself, "Is this really simply a game?. Now logically speaking yes but the scene had such a profound affect on me that it changed my way of viewing games in general. Only MGS, Xenogears, and FFT will ever be able to pull off something as profound for me.

Quote:

---

Goldenboko, about our argument on deep, I agree with what you're saying 100%, FFVI is is a very emotionally moving game. I'm a young man, but I'm not afraid to admit that there are a few FF's that made me cry/want to cry, and VI is one of those games. But My whole point about the the writing and the deepness of it is to illustrate the REVOLUTIONARY change that it provided. Social Commentary is something that was absent from video games, at least in the popular sphere, especially dealing with it philosophically and eruditely (is this a word?) like FFVII did, so I consider that to be VERY revolutionary. VI also (and i realize that this is not your favorite) dealt with many issues, but I think it was VII that brought them to the forefront because it dealt with so many different things, environmental issues, the effects of science and technology, militarism, nationalism, capitalism, cultural conflict and resistance, and while VI and previous games may have touched on these things, they were only able to do just that - touch on them. VII brought them to the forefront and added an artistic credibility that isn't present in previous games and THAT'S REVOLUTIONARY.

---

You forget a little gem of a game called Chrono Trigger. CT did more than touch upon the subjects of honor, patriotism, eviromentalism, militarism, racial hatred, and the subject of owning up to ones mistakes. As I stated before, had I never played this game before VII i could see how it could be percieved as profound. Even then, Xenogears is a game that touched on more adult themes and explored them far better than anythig the FF series has been able to produce. VII comes off pretty shallow when compared to Xenogears and is at least equal to CT in regards to storytelling and plot.

Quote:

---

There's more to say, but I would address Kanno again, the key here is change, and you say that IV and II also set the bar for RPG's, but how drastic is that compared to VII? After Final Fantasy VII I witnessed entire sub-genres of RPG's die out. Before that game there were many different systems and battle systems that RPG's employed, but after this the genre almost became synonymous for menu-command and turn-based battle, in one way or another, many RPGs that follow emulating FFVII's ATB system. Strategy RPGs were my favorite kind of RPG due to everything that was built in to them, and after FFVII, I saw this artform completely disappear off the market. Except for Final Fantasy Tactics, which to me was the last hurrah for the sub-genre, and I would agree with you in many ways when you said that FFT is probably the best work in the series, but that's another debate.

I have 9 minutes to eat lunch before my next class so i gotta jet, i'll check up on this later.

---

Glad we agreed on Tactics at least but I'm surprised you can't see what II and IV did to the series. II brought forth the emphasis of storytelling in RPGs. Before it all RPGs were quests where you name a party and send them to right the wrongs of the land. II brought forth a cohesive tale where your party is actually saving the world cause it matters to them. Considering how after FFII just about every RPG now featured more personal stories is a testament to it's impact on the genre.

IV expands upon this notion by being the first game with a fully fleshed out cast of characters. You no longer just have your party of job classes you picked out and named, they are characters who are predetermined and have reasons and motives. IV could be thought of as inevitable leap since technology prevented this kind of storytelling on the NES but IV is often cited as the game that brought the focus of RPGs to storytelling and characters.

As for VII wiping out sub genres, I feel you are quite mistaken. SRPGs are alive and well and you forget that Vandal Hearts and Front Mission III were also released for the PS1 as well as a collection of other less known SRPGs. Action RPGs were barely affected with Brave Fencer Musashi, Threads of Fate, and Vagrant Story leading the way.

Yes alot of companies turned to the ATB system but it was solely to cash in on the RPG craze that VII had created. Even then other games had used ATB before VII while many still don't use it. Most of the games that tried to follow the VII formula failed and even Square (though I'm probably giving them more credit than they deserve) seemed to know that VII was a fluke. They knew they "caught lightning", not that they made some "magic bullet" or "magic blueprint" for making great games. VII was a game that was just the acculmination of everything before. It was with VIII they truly tried to revolutionize the rpg genre.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Heath

I think the main way the game revolutionised the series was by introducing it to a wider audience. To my knowledge, none of the previous Final Fantasy games actually got a European release (Wikipedia certainly doesn't give any release dates for European versions of FFI, FFIV and FFVI). In a way, I'd say the game revolutionised how people viewed RPGs and the audience itself to as large (if not larger) extent than the series itself. Though FFVII has, obviously had some noticeable effects upon the Final Fantasy series itself.

---

This is true and another thing people fail to remember. VII recieved a larger release than any other RPG before it and VII also had a greater Ad campaign than any game brfore it. It was exposed to a larger audiance which is why it has a larger audiance than most games. The fact that ealier titles and cult games like Xenogears and Disgaea have sold so well despite little PR can be interpreted to the notion that the quality of VII was not the major contributing factor to it's success.

Now I'm certain you will have a lot to say on my point and I look forward to it. This really is a quality debate;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno

VII recieved a larger release than any other RPG before it and VII also had a greater Ad campaign than any game brfore it. It was exposed to a larger audiance which is why it has a larger audiance than most games.

---

Very true. When FFVII was released there was a very aggressive tv ad campaign and I remember my roommates asking, "What the hell is Final Fantasy?"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Griff

You may all continue with the ripping out of each other's throats.

---

lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bipper

I like VI and VII. VII was not revolutionary, unless you count the game being played out by popeye the sailor man, with those big bulge forearms. When I first turned on the game, I seen cloud and wondered how much uhm.. "pole vaulting" he must be guilty of. Then I seen how he reacted to Tifa and her assets, and well -- I understood.

Either way, VII was alright, but it is where the series starts diving like a special Olympic gymnast. Flopping all the way. Come to think of ti, I really don't like VII all that much. humph.

---

VII is better than VIII and IX. And X. And XI and XII. And it will probably be better than the rest.

I am currently playing VI (which I think is a very fun, humorous game-KEFKA is teh sex) and I am amazed at the graphic changes. I think a lot of people bought this game because the series was very popular at the time, AND the graphics were becoming revolutionary.

Not to mention the cameos of "hot" Tifa and Aeris, along with the badass sephy. Who wouldn't buy it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goldenboko

Your problem is you don't read/listen to what WE say. I've read your argument several times. And proved several things you don't listen to.

I'm saying VII isn't the only FF that still sells well on the internet. I type in Final Fantasy in eBay what do I get This. Not only FFVII is there, but Anthology is there (V, and VI), VII is there, XII is there. Besides selling well has NOTHING to do revolutionary. VIII sold well, it was, in no way revolutionary. IX sold well, it was just a TRIBUTE to the past ones, not revolutionary.

And your saying "their all revolutionary blah blah blah, that includes FFVII"

If you read what I said, I said FFI was revolutionary, it started it all, none of the others were.

Now perhaps if you READ my POST, then we can make PROGRESS, like whats suppose to happen in DEBATES.

---

You still zoomed right over what I said.

1. Final Fantasy VII continues to sell WELL 10 years after its release. Its selling more then Anthologies. And XII.

2. I'll repeat this again: Final Fantasy I revolutionized RPG's. Final Fantasy VII revolutionized Final Fantasy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno

Now I'm certain you will have a lot to say on my point and I look forward to it. This really is a quality debate;)

---

lol YES as a matter of fact i do :p but i'll try to be brief with each point.

1. With regardes to Sega CD, you're right, and that's something i want to bring up everytime someone says "interactive movie" that every FF has scenes where you don't do anything. My point was that Sega CD was one approach to the capabilities of CD, and Playstation and Sega Saturn were another. FFVII was the first modern video game in that it combined both aspects in the right ratio.

2. I am not downplaying any of the earlier games. II and IV were both very revolutionary games. Especially when you consider their eras. But the differences between the first 6 games are much much smaller than their differences with FFVII. I am trying to illustrate the change, the entire basis for calling something revolutionary.

3. To this day I am still ashamed to say I've never beaten Chrono Trigger. But you're absolutely right that much of VII was influenced by what was accomplished in that game. But the issues dealt with (as much as I played) barely go further than skin deep. Like you said, there were limitations on these games, and they weren't able to thoroughly explore, explain, and allude to these themes as much as they did on FFVII.

4. Xenogears is one of the deepest RPG's of all time, but its place in this discussion is irrelevant due to the fact that it came after VII.

5. The fact that you call FFVII a fluke makes me question as to whether or not you were playing video games at the time (i'm sure you were). This game drove people nuts when it came out. There was nothing like it. If you were even a casual gamer, you couldn't escape it. Magazines couldn't stop talking about it, and it pervaded almost every discussion on video games for quite a long time. I remember my little brother watching me play it all the time for the sole reason that he wouldn't be left out of everyone in his school talking about it.

6. This follows from 5 in that it wasn't a fluke because of its brilliant marketing campaign, which you speak of later on (so why do you call it a fluke?). One of my professors, who has a Ph.D. in Political Science, brought FFVII up in our class on Public Opinion & Propaganda, due to it having a marketing campaign unlike any other game before its time. It was advertised on television, in comic books, magazines, even playboy. Square knew what they were doing, and this illustrates my theme that VII revolutionised FF, RPG's and video games

7. And this follows from 6 - that Square knew what a big step they were taking. There were over 200 artists employed for this game alone. They were breaking new ground in the FMV scene, with the types of illustrations they were using with the pre-rendered backgrounds, the development alone of this game is like nothing ever seen before. They needed to see a return on that and they were able to do it.

8. VIII wasn't the revolution, it was the first game (first FF) to come out AFTER the revolution.

I'd just want to end saying that when you look at FF before and after FFVII it is two completely different things. You are correct in pointing out that it was the culmination of many aspects that were pioneered before it - ATB, battle screens, character driven stories, etc. But in many ways, it completely changed the way these games were made - the backgrounds, 3d character models, use of FMV, sound format, scope and depth of issues covered, disc format, etc. For someone to say that FFVII didn't revolutionise the series is very odd and peculiar to me.

I think i've pretty much said everything I could possibly say. I'm gonna fall back for a little bit in this thread and see where other people take this. But I just want to remind everyone that the point of this thread is how much FFVII revolutionized the series, so when I see/hear people say not at all, I find it redundant for me to even have to come in here and provide examples of how it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goldenboko

Your problem is you don't read/listen to what WE say. I've read your argument several times. And proved several things you don't listen to.

I'm saying VII isn't the only FF that still sells well on the internet. I type in Final Fantasy in eBay what do I get This. Not only FFVII is there, but Anthology is there (V, and VI), VII is there, XII is there. Besides selling well has NOTHING to do revolutionary. VIII sold well, it was, in no way revolutionary. IX sold well, it was just a TRIBUTE to the past ones, not revolutionary.

And your saying "their all revolutionary blah blah blah, that includes FFVII"

If you read what I said, I said FFI was revolutionary, it started it all, none of the others were.

Now perhaps if you READ my POST, then we can make PROGRESS, like whats suppose to happen in DEBATES.

---

You still zoomed right over what I said.

1. Final Fantasy VII continues to sell WELL 10 years after its release. Its selling more then Anthologies. And XII.

2. I'll repeat this again: Final Fantasy I revolutionized RPG's. Final Fantasy VII revolutionized Final Fantasy.

---

1. Prove it. I can sit here and say FFI sold 3 million copies yesterday, that doesn't make it true.

2. I've stopped taking that seriously, can't you see that. Your suppose to be telling me why FFVII is revolutionary in anyway you've failed to do so. Your main argument has been the very thing you've been arguing for.

FFVII iz teh revolutoniary becuz it had the Sephroth and Ariess and cloud is totlly sexy. Oh and Tifa has bewbiez and omg teh grafix r so relaistic!!!!!!11111!1 Cloud has a nice ass to teehee i wanna glomp him

Good grief, I think I just killed half of my neurons by typing that. o_O

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by *~Dagger Trepe~*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bipper

I like VI and VII. VII was not revolutionary, unless you count the game being played out by popeye the sailor man, with those big bulge forearms. When I first turned on the game, I seen cloud and wondered how much uhm.. "pole vaulting" he must be guilty of. Then I seen how he reacted to Tifa and her assets, and well -- I understood.

Either way, VII was alright, but it is where the series starts diving like a special Olympic gymnast. Flopping all the way. Come to think of ti, I really don't like VII all that much. humph.

---

VII is better than VIII and IX. And X. And XI and XII. And it will probably be better than the rest.

I am currently playing VI (which I think is a very fun, humorous game-KEFKA is teh sex) and I am amazed at the graphic changes. I think a lot of people bought this game because the series was very popular at the time, AND the graphics were becoming revolutionary.

Not to mention the cameos of "hot" Tifa and Aeris, along with the badass sephy. Who wouldn't buy it?

---

Yeah, like I said, it basically peaked at VI and is flopping down since, IMO. In fact, I fell that I like VI the best
then it branches down like this.

VI
V VII
IV VIII
III IX
II X
I XI

Still gotta do XII

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

1. With regardes to Sega CD, you're right, and that's something i want to bring up everytime someone says "interactive movie" that every FF has scenes where you don't do anything. My point was that Sega CD was one approach to the capabilities of CD, and Playstation and Sega Saturn were another. FFVII was the first modern video game in that it combined both aspects in the right ratio.

---

I agree with you.

Quote:

---

2. I am not downplaying any of the earlier games. II and IV were both very revolutionary games. Especially when you consider their eras. But the differences between the first 6 games are much much smaller than their differences with FFVII. I am trying to illustrate the change, the entire basis for calling something revolutionary.

---

This is where you and I will always disagree I'm afraid. In my original post , I mention how the addition of storytelling and characters truly changed the entire genre. VII never introduced something so profound, you say it's storytelling was revolutionary for being deep but that in my opinion is nothing more than a miniscule advancement since the things I spoke of practically changed the genre permanently, whereas your point can be thought of as a logical next step. I mention that considering the technology limits of the earlier games, it's rather impressive and profound that they are as deep as they come off to be. VII was one of the first games (though I still argue that VI and CT beat it to the punch) to tell a more complex story because the technology allowed it. VII being able to tell the story cause of technoloy improvements is no where nesr as revolutionary than introducing the need for story and characters in the first place. To me, II and IV revolutionized the genre, VII just capitalized on what came before it and that's my general stance of "VII's Revolution in Gaming"

Quote:

---

3. To this day I am still ashamed to say I've never beaten Chrono Trigger. But you're absolutely right that much of VII was influenced by what was accomplished in that game. But the issues dealt with (as much as I played) barely go further than skin deep. Like you said, there were limitations on these games, and they weren't able to thoroughly explore, explain, and allude to these themes as much as they did on FFVII.

---

You should play it again and finish it. It's far deeper than you think it is. It's just not as preachy as VII;) . Once again I find something we will probably never agree upon I'm afraid. You speak of VII story as "deep and profound" yet you fail to see that I as well as many other people, don't feel this way. Due to technology, VII could tell more elaborate and complex stories. That does not necessarily mean they were good.

I love VII's world and it's central theme of Life (which is the only thing I feel is actually "deep" about this game) but I feel it's cast of characters are shallow and cliched ridden and it's plot is written in a confusing way to make people believe that's it's actually profound when in reality it's just superflous fluff created to make the game seem intellectually stimulating and to serve as ameans to keep the player mentally enthralled. To me, VII is no more deeper than any of the previous six installments of the franchise. But to be fair, I don;t feel any of the main line FF games are actually deep or profound, they are just fun and entertaining.:p

Quote:

---

4. Xenogears is one of the deepest RPG's of all time, but its place in this discussion is irrelevant due to the fact that it came after VII.

---

Xenogears started production at the same time as VII so I highly doubt VII truly impacted it except for actually letting it see release outside of Japan.

Quote:

---

5. The fact that you call FFVII a fluke makes me question as to whether or not you were playing video games at the time (i'm sure you were). This game drove people nuts when it came out. There was nothing like it. If you were even a casual gamer, you couldn't escape it. Magazines couldn't stop talking about it, and it pervaded almost every discussion on video games for quite a long time. I remember my little brother watching me play it all the time for the sole reason that he wouldn't be left out of everyone in his school talking about it.

---

I remember the hype, I mentioned once in another thread how I gave into the hype of VII and walked away rather disappointed.

Now "fluke" may have been the wrong word, I pretty much meant it was a "one time deal". Most people were still shocked to hear Square leaving Nintendo and the whole "Final Fantasy 64" demo had people specualting. Not to mention that the overwhelming success of Secret of Mana, Chrono Trigger, Final Fantasy VI and Super Mario RPG had finally began to let RPGs get noticed outside of Japan. VII appears, making the leap to 3D, as has been mentioned before, VII didn't have to do this but it did. Fans were shocked to learn that Amano was no longer character designer and were thrown off by Nomura's heavy anime influenced designs.

Then the PR kicked in...

Quote:

---

6. This follows from 5 in that it wasn't a fluke because of its brilliant marketing campaign, which you speak of later on (so why do you call it a fluke?). One of my professors, who has a Ph.D. in Political Science, brought FFVII up in our class on Public Opinion & Propaganda, due to it having a marketing campaign unlike any other game before its time. It was advertised on television, in comic books, magazines, even playboy. Square knew what they were doing, and this illustrates my theme that VII revolutionised FF, RPG's and video games

7. And this follows from 6 - that Square knew what a big step they were taking. There were over 200 artists employed for this game alone. They were breaking new ground in the FMV scene, with the types of illustrations they were using with the pre-rendered backgrounds, the development alone of this game is like nothing ever seen before. They needed to see a return on that and they were able to do it.

---

I'm certain many at Square thought the game would be a revolution, but it can easily be argued that from a buisness standpoint, Square was trying to finally move out of the shadow of Nintendo. Before the Playstaion, few people actually talked about the companies that make their games, only the systems they were published for. Free from Nintendo and under Sony's more "user friendly" policies, Square could gain recognition. That's why so much effort went into VII, it was Square trying to prove they didn't need Nintendo, not because they thought they were going to reinvent the "RPG Wheel".

Besides, when you spend over 7 millions dollars on one game, you better be damn sure it sells well. That's why it had a massive PR campaign. Hell, even FFtactics got in on the action.

Quote:

---

8. VIII wasn't the revolution, it was the first game (first FF) to come out AFTER the revolution.

---

I think you and I have different definitions of "revolution". Now I agree that VIII wasn't a revolution but it deserves credit for trying new things (I know you weren't talking bad about it though).

VII didn't bring anything new to RPGs except for CG cut scenes and it just happened to be the game that is credited for bringing RPG's into the mainstream outside of Japan. The move to 3D is not nearly as revolutionary to RPGs as it was to platformers and fighting games. 3D brought about new advancements for gameplay and changed the genre. 3D in a RPG is a change in visual style and nothing more. Many of the things you feel VII was revolutionary in, existed before it. The RPG genre was already a rich and varied genre before VII came out.

Quote:

---

I'd just want to end saying that when you look at FF before and after FFVII it is two completely different things. You are correct in pointing out that it was the culmination of many aspects that were pioneered before it - ATB, battle screens, character driven stories, etc. But in many ways, it completely changed the way these games were made - the backgrounds, 3d character models, use of FMV, sound format, scope and depth of issues covered, disc format, etc. For someone to say that FFVII didn't revolutionise the series is very odd and peculiar to me.

---

No, I don't see much of a difference, perhaps quality but that's the natural course of action, it's not brought about because of one variable. It was happening before VII it is happening now. I feel you have truly given this game way more credit than it ever deserved.
It wasn't a revolution. To many it was but that's due to their ignorance. For many (and I doubt you are one of these) VII was the first RPG they ever picked up, it's revolutionary cause they never saw anything like it before. That's where all the hype from the PR came from. Not because VII did something wonderfully innovative but rather it was the first for alot of people.

I wasn't impressed by the game as many others are as well. We have all "been there, done that, got the T-Shirt". Now for you it may have been a transcending experience but you need to realize that it wasn't for everyone. The majority of VII's fanbase are people who never even heard of the term RPG before it came out. It opened the eyes to alot of people to a genre they didn't know existed. It did not suddenly transcend the very being of what the genre is supposed to be. II and IV did that.;)

Now I highly doubt you will stay quiet now...

*standing up and cheering*

It's like the words came out of my head into wonderous thread posts of truth! PRAISE BE TO KANNO ON THIS GLORIOUS DAY!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

You should play it again and finish it. It's far deeper than you think it is. It's just not as preachy as VII;) . Once again I find something we will probably never agree upon I'm afraid. You speak of VII story as "deep and profound" yet you fail to see that I as well as many other people, don't feel this way. Due to technology, VII could tell more elaborate and complex stories. That does not necessarily mean they were good.

I love VII's world and it's central theme of Life (which is the only thing I feel is actually "deep" about this game) but I feel it's cast of characters are shallow and cliched ridden and it's plot is written in a confusing way to make people believe that's it's actually profound when in reality it's just superflous fluff created to make the game seem intellectually stimulating and to serve as ameans to keep the player mentally enthralled. To me, VII is no more deeper than any of the previous six installments of the franchise. But to be fair, I don;t feel any of the main line FF games are actually deep or profound, they are just fun and entertaining.:p

---

I like the way you debate. You do it in a very kind manner. :)

There is only one point I have to solely disagree with, and that is the characters.

I thought all the characters were very shallow at the beginning, but as the plot drove on, you could surely see some human-like traits sprouting up in the characters. By the end, you were so attached to all the people in the game because you knew who they were and what they were all about because you've been with them for the whole time. Heck, you get pretty damn attached to Aeris by the end of disk one because they did a pretty nice job of delving into her character before she died. But they didn't over do it because it left you wondering:

I wanted to know more about her!

So, you keep playing the game, in hopes Aeris might somehow magically be resurrected. But instead you find that you are really weaving through the characters, especially Cloud and Tifa. The end of the game really showed true emotions.

Woo, read the whole thread. That takes determination.


Now for me, FFVII was not revolution. All it did was take older concepts, and expanded on them. Take FMV's for example. Correct me if I am wrong, but in Final Fantasy VI wasn't there a "FMV-esque SNES" cut-scene right after everyone escaped from the floating continent after Kefka abused the Warring Triad (it was in 2-D though, more specifically showing the planet being turned into the WoR)? Now I played the Advance version of FFVI (not the SNES), so it could have FFVIA only, but the point is Square tried to do a scene that was done differently than the typical S/NES cut-scene

What did FFVII do? It merely took the concept of FMV's, and used the PlaySation's power, to produce a high-quality FMV.

Actually, generally speaking, FFVII took CONCEPTS from previous RPG installments, and used the power from the PlayStation and making it better quality. One thing though, THE CONCEPT NEVER CHANGED. Only the quality/power of the concept change, but not the concept itself.

Now part of the term revolution is that it brings something radically new to the series. The only thing that FFVII brought, generally speaking, was power. That isn't something radically new. The concepts all remained the same, they were simply improved. NOT revolutionized.

Also, all the gameplay mechanics were just concepts taken from previous games. For example, Materia was a combination of Espers and Relics from FFVI IMO. The Limit Breaks were already done before. Heck, one could argue the biggest change in gameplay was 3 people instead of 4.

That aside, anything "NEW" about FFVII is merely a vastly improved idea from past RPG games, or something incredibly minor. Now the story I don't see as revolutionary. It was new, I will give you that (but every story is pretty new), but one could argue that Final Fantasy VI was complex, or Final Fantasy IV. Or Chrono Trigger. How complex a story is can't be defined. One could say CT is more complex than FFVII, or vica-versa. But it isn't enough to pass it off as a revolution. If so, every RPG could be argued a revolution.

Also it seems some people (typically those in favor of FFVII being revolutionary) seem to not understand the fact that a game doesn't need to be revolutionary in order to be GOOD. You can say FFVII is your favorite or is the best or whatnot, but it is an opinion through and through, and moreover it has nothing to do with how revolutionary it is. On a somewhat related note, how well a game sells has NOTHING to do with how revolutionary it is.

Movie games sell very well, and 99% of the time they aren't good games NOR revolutionary. Granted their sales are like fads (sell very high, and then fail to sell later).

So basically, sales have nothing to do with good, bad, or revolutionary a game is. It only shows one thing: the game is popular.

Wow, I choose not to respond to this thread for a little while and I get swamped with too much stuff to dare to read. All I can say is...

What Zora said. >.>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno

Now I highly doubt you will stay quiet now...

---

haha, well I hope I don't dissapoint you, but I feel like I said everything I have to say. I just wanted to say I think this has been a top knotch debate, and I'm amazed that it hasn't devolved to us calling eachother fanboys (except for Avarice :choc: ). I have to admit, it's hard to challenge your counter-arguments, i think we're more on a misunderstanding than a disagreement. But yeah, i'm interested in where other people will take this, Dagger and Zora have both brought up good points, its been really interesting so far.:cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by *~Dagger Trepe~*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

You should play it again and finish it. It's far deeper than you think it is. It's just not as preachy as VII;) . Once again I find something we will probably never agree upon I'm afraid. You speak of VII story as "deep and profound" yet you fail to see that I as well as many other people, don't feel this way. Due to technology, VII could tell more elaborate and complex stories. That does not necessarily mean they were good.

I love VII's world and it's central theme of Life (which is the only thing I feel is actually "deep" about this game) but I feel it's cast of characters are shallow and cliched ridden and it's plot is written in a confusing way to make people believe that's it's actually profound when in reality it's just superflous fluff created to make the game seem intellectually stimulating and to serve as ameans to keep the player mentally enthralled. To me, VII is no more deeper than any of the previous six installments of the franchise. But to be fair, I don;t feel any of the main line FF games are actually deep or profound, they are just fun and entertaining.:p

---

I like the way you debate. You do it in a very kind manner. :)

There is only one point I have to solely disagree with, and that is the characters.

I thought all the characters were very shallow at the beginning, but as the plot drove on, you could surely see some human-like traits sprouting up in the characters. By the end, you were so attached to all the people in the game because you knew who they were and what they were all about because you've been with them for the whole time. Heck, you get pretty damn attached to Aeris by the end of disk one because they did a pretty nice job of delving into her character before she died. But they didn't over do it because it left you wondering:

I wanted to know more about her!

So, you keep playing the game, in hopes Aeris might somehow magically be resurrected. But instead you find that you are really weaving through the characters, especially Cloud and Tifa. The end of the game really showed true emotions.

---

I'm afraid I'm not nearly as eloquent in real life but thank you for the compliment, as well as you Avarice.

As for your points, it comes down to personal opinion and taste at this point. Though I am afraid I can't emphasize specifically to your feelings concerning VII, I can at least do it from someone who has played many games and agree that it's these elements that keep us playing this wonderful genre.

VII's cast did little for me, though I still love Cid and the Turks very much;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zora

Woo, read the whole thread. That takes determination.


Now for me, FFVII was not revolution. All it did was take older concepts, and expanded on them. Take FMV's for example. Correct me if I am wrong, but in Final Fantasy VI wasn't there a "FMV-esque SNES" cut-scene right after everyone escaped from the floating continent after Kefka abused the Warring Triad (it was in 2-D though, more specifically showing the planet being turned into the WoR)? Now I played the Advance version of FFVI (not the SNES), so it could have FFVIA only, but the point is Square tried to do a scene that was done differently than the typical S/NES cut-scene

What did FFVII do? It merely took the concept of FMV's, and used the PlaySation's power, to produce a high-quality FMV.

Actually, generally speaking, FFVII took CONCEPTS from previous RPG installments, and used the power from the PlayStation and making it better quality. One thing though, THE CONCEPT NEVER CHANGED. Only the quality/power of the concept change, but not the concept itself.

Now part of the term revolution is that it brings something radically new to the series. The only thing that FFVII brought, generally speaking, was power. That isn't something radically new. The concepts all remained the same, they were simply improved. NOT revolutionized.

Also, all the gameplay mechanics were just concepts taken from previous games. For example, Materia was a combination of Espers and Relics from FFVI IMO. The Limit Breaks were already done before. Heck, one could argue the biggest change in gameplay was 3 people instead of 4.

That aside, anything "NEW" about FFVII is merely a vastly improved idea from past RPG games, or something incredibly minor. Now the story I don't see as revolutionary. It was new, I will give you that (but every story is pretty new), but one could argue that Final Fantasy VI was complex, or Final Fantasy IV. Or Chrono Trigger. How complex a story is can't be defined. One could say CT is more complex than FFVII, or vica-versa. But it isn't enough to pass it off as a revolution. If so, every RPG could be argued a revolution.

Also it seems some people (typically those in favor of FFVII being revolutionary) seem to not understand the fact that a game doesn't need to be revolutionary in order to be GOOD. You can say FFVII is your favorite or is the best or whatnot, but it is an opinion through and through, and moreover it has nothing to do with how revolutionary it is. On a somewhat related note, how well a game sells has NOTHING to do with how revolutionary it is.

Movie games sell very well, and 99% of the time they aren't good games NOR revolutionary. Granted their sales are like fads (sell very high, and then fail to sell later).

So basically, sales have nothing to do with good, bad, or revolutionary a game is. It only shows one thing: the game is popular.

---

I agree. And I do feel that many people (and I'm guilty of this too sometimes) that we mistake this debate and turn it into a debate of whether VII was actually a good game.

I don't feel VII is a revolution to the genre or series, but I do believe it's a solid game with excellent quality that holds up to this day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno

Now I highly doubt you will stay quiet now...

---

haha, well I hope I don't dissapoint you, but I feel like I said everything I have to say. I just wanted to say I think this has been a top knotch debate, and I'm amazed that it hasn't devolved to us calling eachother fanboys (except for Avarice :choc: ). I have to admit, it's hard to challenge your counter-arguments, i think we're more on a misunderstanding than a disagreement. But yeah, i'm interested in where other people will take this, Dagger and Zora have both brought up good points, its been really interesting so far.:cool:

---

I'm a bit surprised, but I can see your point. I too will probably bow out as I've stated my main points. It seems continuing would only result in me repeating myself which is a clear indicator that the debate is mostly over. It all comes down to personal opinion but at least we may have all learned a bit more about each other.;)

This is truly one of the better debates I've been in outside of the XII forums. I hope this thread continues and who knows, maybe someone will find some new element we missed originally.

I know the feeling;

Final Fantasy VII the most revolutionary thing in the world...

until you play the rest and see which one is truly the most revolutionary.

and yes, I know exactly what it means.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goldenboko

What Zora said. >.>

---

Very nice. So in the end, we all agree that FFVII brought new ideas, or as you all so grudgingly admit "vastly improved ideas" to the table. Which is the deffinition of revolutionary, which I posted earlier. Final Fantasy X also revolutionized the series as being the first on PS2 and so will XIII for being the first on PS3. Thats new. Its a new system, new power, things that couldnt be done before can now be possible with new hardware. You can put it all on the Playstation, but in the end, people play FFVII ON the Playstation. The Playstation was just a tool used to help create this game.

Like I said, my point was proven. It was revolutionary, and you all admit it.:D

grim07, it seems that everyone else in this thread understands what revolutionary means except for you, so I'm going to explain what revolutionary is:

Quote:

---

Revolutionary
- radically new or innovative; unexpected, outside or beyond established procedure, principles, etc.: a revolutionary discovery.

---

As I have stated before, being new in-and-of-itself does not make something revolutionary. If this was the case, getting a new haircut or trying a new type of food would be revolutionary, but it's far from it. FFVII had several new ideas, themes and technologies used, but none were beyond established procedures or unexpected. Yes, it was new to have 3D graphics, but it was expected that gaming would move to the 3D realm with the next generation of consoles after the 16-bit generation. Yes, there was greater depth in the story, but the series is always striving to tell more in-depth stories as a whole, so again, this is expected and the natural progression.

For FFVII to be revolutionary it would have had to have a radical departure from any of the "norms" that the series held, which it didn't, it only expanded and improved upon other ideas.

So, in response to your last post:

Quote:

---

So in the end, we all agree that FFVII brought new ideas, or as you all so grudgingly admit "vastly improved ideas" to the table. Which is the deffinition of revolutionary...

---

Yes, we did agree that there were improvements, but no, they do not meet the definition of revolutionary.

I still agree with you grim!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flying Mullet

grim07, it seems that everyone else in this thread understands what revolutionary means except for you, so I'm going to explain what revolutionary is:

Quote:

---

Revolutionary
- radically new or innovative; unexpected, outside or beyond established procedure, principles, etc.: a revolutionary discovery.

---

As I have stated before, being new in-and-of-itself does not make something revolutionary. If this was the case, getting a new haircut or trying a new type of food would be revolutionary, but it's far from it. FFVII had several new ideas, themes and technologies used, but none were beyond established procedures or unexpected. Yes, it was new to have 3D graphics, but it was expected that gaming would move to the 3D realm with the next generation of consoles after the 16-bit generation. Yes, there was greater depth in the story, but the series is always striving to tell more in-depth stories as a whole, so again, this is expected and the natural progression.

For FFVII to be revolutionary it would have had to have a radical departure from any of the "norms" that the series held, which it didn't, it only expanded and improved upon other ideas.

So, in response to your last post:

Quote:

---

So in the end, we all agree that FFVII brought new ideas, or as you all so grudgingly admit "vastly improved ideas" to the table. Which is the deffinition of revolutionary...

---

Yes, we did agree that there were improvements, but no, they do not meet the definition of revolutionary.

---

Actually, getting a new haircut or trying a new food WOULD be revolutionary for you, as it fits the deffinition. FF VII had several new ideas. Your own words. While you can assume it was the natural progession of technology, and all games where expected to make this leap eventually, FFVII was the FIRST FF GAME to do so. Its like man landing on the moon. We all new it was gunna happen one day. It was inevitable. Technology was taking us there. Did that make it any less revolutionary when it happened? NOPE. Just because time and technology is leading us somewhere, doesnt mean that the first thing that does it isnt revolutionary.

Call them improvments, but the change from 2D to 3D graphics is a radically new change for the Final Fantasy series, and that alone makes it revolutionary. Text book deffinition as cited by you.

I rest my case. Again.

Yes, FFVII WAS revolutionary, I am not a big fan of the game and I recognize the fact that it was a huge milestone in FF history. The main fact is that it attracted so many new people to the RPG scene, which wasn't nearly as big before PS1 days. Was it the first sci-fi RPG? nope, you got Phantasy Star and the like, but it was the first in the Final Fantasy series to show modernized things the way it did, but that isn't revolutionary, it really only has to do with THAT game alone, not the series as a whole.

The graphics? FF turning 3D was inevitable, you can't say FFVII alone is what cause this, technology and time caused this.

I felt the characters to be pretty static and lacking, but you can't expect much from a JRPG anyway.

Basically I just recognize that it brought so many newcomers to the genre and helped bring RPGs to the mainstream, without VII there probably wouldn't be half the innovative and great PSX games that were released.

Yeah, probably. All it did was cause fan-dom. Fanboy-ism.

Ahh, I see that people are finally turning around and realizing it. You can hate this game as much as you want, call it every name in the book, pick out every little detail, but in the end, it WAS revolutionary, and you have to admit it.

Amen!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

Ahh, I see that people are finally turning around and realizing it. You can hate this game as much as you want, call it every name in the book, pick out every little detail, but in the end, it WAS revolutionary, and you have to admit it.

---

Wait people actually admitted that it was "revolutionary" xD

Epic rolling Lol's are in order.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Yeah so I still don't agree with it being "revolutionary." Yes it may follow the definition in the dictionary, but you know what other kind of words are in the dictionary? Words like "Ginormous", honestly now. I believe a revolution is something like oh I don't know, another country invading another changing for MANY MANY MANY YEARS, the mindsets of the people in the country, eventually leading to their own rebelion and a whole new country of their own. I have yet to see any game maker quoted to say that FFVII was their inspiration for their games, nor have I even seen anyone say that other FF games were inspired by FFVII other than the spinoffs the game has oh so adequetly gained.

Now, if I'm wrong, correct me, but correct me with the -proof- that things like this have been said by the people who matter, AKA the creators of the FF's after FFVII, and/or various other game people saying that FFVII was their inspiration on creating their own game. If it was revolutionary, it would have impacted something other than the fans, it would have impacted the entire gaming, or even lower, just the RPG industry, and all you've been able to do is tell us things with out actual proof. If you have the proof link it, if you don't, don't expect everyone to believe you just because you tell us it's revolutionary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

Ahh, I see that people are finally turning around and realizing it. You can hate this game as much as you want, call it every name in the book, pick out every little detail, but in the end, it WAS revolutionary, and you have to admit it.

---

I don't think it's as revolutionary as people keep saying it is though. It's revolutionary in the same way Mario 64 was. I kind of feel it was technology that was revolutionary, not the game itself, if the game came out as FFVI with the same exact story line but on a 2D system, it would be nowhere as popular. If FFVIII was released first, then VII, then people would say that VIII was revolutionary. The Playstation plays a huge role in it, if that system was a commercial failure then no one would give a crap about FFVII.

i do think FFVII is revolutionary. Now i'm not just saying this because its my favo FF, but because it certainly did a lot to the RPG and gaming world. I don't know if there were games with FMVs like that at the time. We did have great stories before FFVII though(see Chrono Trigger) but i don't think anyone can argue FFVII meant a lot to the gaming world. It did bring new stuff..gameplay that was really refreshing(Materia system for example) and it just had a great atmosphere. To this day no game is as well made as FFVII in my book. Some games do come close(like FFX or KH2 imo) but it's revolutionary in many ways. Now i'm not going to start the details about everything that made it revolutionary(this 6 page discussion should tell youxD) But i do agree that the marketing for the game was huge and when the time when this game was agreed nobody had experienced anything like it. I guess that's why many recall it being revolutionary. One thing is clear..the game is really popularxD

I could argue wether it was or not but grims pretty much said everything I can think of.

So yeah I agree with grim. :)

I fail to see how the Materia system was revolutionary, if it stuck with the franchise then I would agree...but each Final Fantasy game has its own unique system, III and V had jobs, VI had espers, IX had the abilities, X had sphere grid etc. The FMVs were pretty much the only revolutionary part, because it introduced short, detailed (although in FF7 most of the time it was just the normal character models placed over the detailed movies) cut scenes to display visually what telling even the greatest story in the 2D games couldn't do, adding more depth to the game.

Not to mention this game had the hottest badass. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by *~Dagger Trepe~*

Not to mention this game had the hottest badass. :)

---

I hope you mean Cid, because he's the only badass in the game.

I meant Sephy...:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by *~Dagger Trepe~*

I meant Sephy...:)

---

Sephiroth? A badass? WHAT. He slept the whole game and is a mama's boy who didn't say a word in the final battle... not a REAL man like Mr. Highwind.

haha..yeah Cid sure was the talker xD but Sephy owns the game xD

virtually all of the commercial success comes from FFVII.

that doesn't make it the best and makes annoying debates and arguments that never die.

I'd imagine its very normal for a series of anything to have a single title that is well known. not neccasarily because its the best. but just for popularity and success. FF7 has so much potential.

I'm trying to think of another thing that was revolutionized in a similar way by a single game/CD E.T.C. but theres nothing wrong with it.

Give credit to all the games but even though the fans may start off NooBish and annoying to you, they'll respect the rest of the series.

Its only takes one game to get you into the series.

for some this was FFX

for some, FF1

but for most, FF7.

thats my piece.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boys from the dwarf

virtually all of the commercial success comes from FFVII.

that doesn't make it the best and makes annoying debates and arguments that never die.

I'd imagine its very normal for a series of anything to have a single title that is well known. not neccasarily because its the best. but just for popularity and success. FF7 has so much potential.

I'm trying to think of another thing that was revolutionized in a similar way by a single game/CD E.T.C. but theres nothing wrong with it.

Give credit to all the games but even though the fans may start off NooBish and annoying to you, they'll respect the rest of the series.

Its only takes one game to get you into the series.

for some this was FFX

for some, FF1

but for most, FF7.

thats my piece.

---

Imo this is the best and most objective post in the entire thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Avarice-ness

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

Ahh, I see that people are finally turning around and realizing it. You can hate this game as much as you want, call it every name in the book, pick out every little detail, but in the end, it WAS revolutionary, and you have to admit it.

---

Wait people actually admitted that it was "revolutionary" xD

Epic rolling Lol's are in order.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Yeah so I still don't agree with it being "revolutionary." Yes it may follow the definition in the dictionary, but you know what other kind of words are in the dictionary? Words like "Ginormous", honestly now. I believe a revolution is something like oh I don't know, another country invading another changing for MANY MANY MANY YEARS, the mindsets of the people in the country, eventually leading to their own rebelion and a whole new country of their own. I have yet to see any game maker quoted to say that FFVII was their inspiration for their games, nor have I even seen anyone say that other FF games were inspired by FFVII other than the spinoffs the game has oh so adequetly gained.

Now, if I'm wrong, correct me, but correct me with the -proof- that things like this have been said by the people who matter, AKA the creators of the FF's after FFVII, and/or various other game people saying that FFVII was their inspiration on creating their own game. If it was revolutionary, it would have impacted something other than the fans, it would have impacted the entire gaming, or even lower, just the RPG industry, and all you've been able to do is tell us things with out actual proof. If you have the proof link it, if you don't, don't expect everyone to believe you just because you tell us it's revolutionary.

---

No matter what form of evidence I provide you, you'll just say its wrong, and attack the source, so I wont even bother. It fits the dictionary term of revolutionary. Revolutionary is NOT a new word. Its been around forever. Why are you trying to argue with a printed deff. of what a word means?

To the rest of you, it may have had "small" revolutionary features to you, it may have had many large ones, it doesn really matter. The bottom line was that it HAD revolutionary features, making IT revolutionary.

And all of you have, at one point or another, admited it. In your own way, whether you said, "All it did was THIS" or "It was only new in THIS way" it doesnt matter. It still did something new, fresh and changing, and DID impact RPG's after it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

Revolutionary is NOT a new word. Its been around forever

---

So it's been around since before the creation of the Earth?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

To the rest of you, it may have had "small" revolutionary features to you, it may have had many large ones, it doesn really matter. The bottom line was that it HAD revolutionary features, making IT revolutionary.

---

Every FF had "small" revolutianary features. So every FF was revolutionary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

and DID impact RPG's after it.

---

So did FFI

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by f f freak

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

Revolutionary is NOT a new word. Its been around forever

---

So it's been around since before the creation of the Earth?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

To the rest of you, it may have had "small" revolutionary features to you, it may have had many large ones, it doesn really matter. The bottom line was that it HAD revolutionary features, making IT revolutionary.

---

Every FF had "small" revolutianary features. So every FF was revolutionary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

and DID impact RPG's after it.

---

So did FFI

---

1. Dont be stupid.

2. Why do I keep having to repeat myself.

Final Fantasy revolutionized RPG's. Final Fantasy VII revolutionized Final Fantasy.

One thing that wasnt small about VII's revolutionary capacity was its graphics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Galvatron

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by *~Dagger Trepe~*

I meant Sephy...:)

---

Sephiroth? A badass? WHAT. He slept the whole game and is a mama's boy who didn't say a word in the final battle... not a REAL man like Mr. Highwind.

---

Sephiroth is hot. :greenie:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by f f freak

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

Revolutionary is NOT a new word. Its been around forever

---

So it's been around since before the creation of the Earth?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

To the rest of you, it may have had "small" revolutionary features to you, it may have had many large ones, it doesn really matter. The bottom line was that it HAD revolutionary features, making IT revolutionary.

---

Every FF had "small" revolutianary features. So every FF was revolutionary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

and DID impact RPG's after it.

---

So did FFI

---

1. Dont be stupid.

2. Why do I keep having to repeat myself.

Final Fantasy revolutionized RPG's. Final Fantasy VII revolutionized Final Fantasy.

One thing that wasnt small about VII's revolutionary capacity was its graphics.

---

I've pretty much given up on this subject. But it was agreed PAGES ago that the graphic situation was a revolution feature of the PS1 not FFVII.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goldenboko

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by f f freak

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

Revolutionary is NOT a new word. Its been around forever

---

So it's been around since before the creation of the Earth?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

To the rest of you, it may have had "small" revolutionary features to you, it may have had many large ones, it doesn really matter. The bottom line was that it HAD revolutionary features, making IT revolutionary.

---

Every FF had "small" revolutianary features. So every FF was revolutionary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

and DID impact RPG's after it.

---

So did FFI

---

1. Dont be stupid.

2. Why do I keep having to repeat myself.

Final Fantasy revolutionized RPG's. Final Fantasy VII revolutionized Final Fantasy.

One thing that wasnt small about VII's revolutionary capacity was its graphics.

---

I've pretty much given up on this subject. But it was agreed PAGES ago that the graphic situation was a revolution feature of the PS1 not FFVII.

---

The playstation is nothing without the game.

And Final Fantasy VII is the first 3d ff which is revolutionary. plain simple unarguable fact. no matter what system powered it, it was the first.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goldenboko

I've pretty much given up on this subject. But it was agreed PAGES ago that the graphic situation was a revolution feature of the PS1 not FFVII.

---

Ditto.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

The playstation is nothing without the game.

And Final Fantasy VII is the first 3d ff which is revolutionary. plain simple unarguable fact. no matter what system powered it, it was the first.

---

If Final Fantasy VII was the first 3D game, or 3D RPG, then it would be revolutionary. But no, it wasn't. The fact that FF7 brought the series into 3D has nothing at all to do with the game, it was just timing and technology. Aside from that, everything else in FF7 was done before it was made. Sales and popularity is what made it revolutionary, that's it. Nothing else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

The playstation is nothing without the game.

---

Incorrect. Even without VII, the Playstation has its entire library of games, most of which are superior in the majority of catergories, enough so that you can claim they are BETTER. VII, however, is useless without a PSX, PS2, PS3 or an emulator for any of the above consoles on PC.

Quote:

---

And Final Fantasy VII is the first 3d ff which is revolutionary. plain simple unarguable fact. no matter what system powered it, it was the first.

---

True. BUT (and this is a big but here) you cannot claim a game is revolutionary based solely on this. And, unlike you, I give evidence.

Definition, if you're interested.

1.

of, pertaining to, characterized by, or of the nature of a revolution, or a sudden, complete, or marked change: a revolutionary junta. Sudden? No. When the Playstation was made, everyone knew it was a matter of time before 3D games became mainstream. Complete? Another no. 2D games didn't die out, so it was only an incomplete change. Marked? (Which means "conspicuous", BTW) Again no. Technology was developing not only in video games, but all forms of electronics. Again, the PS had been around for a while, so nobody was really surprised by VII.

2.

radically new or innovative; outside or beyond established procedure, principles, etc.: a revolutionary discovery. Radically new? Innovative? Outside or beyond established procedures? Yet again no. VII was the first 3D game to become a household name, so many ignorant people think it was the first, and try to claim so on internet fora like EoFF (hint, hint).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flying Mullet

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goldenboko

I've pretty much given up on this subject. But it was agreed PAGES ago that the graphic situation was a revolution feature of the PS1 not FFVII.

---

Ditto.

---

QFT.

Okay, it seems that no one looked at my earlier analogy.

When man first landed on the moon, that was a revolutionary feat. We all knew it was going to happen one day, but that didnt make it any less revolutionary. Unless you think man going into outerspace ISNT revolutionary. And if you do, then there is no hope for you.

Also, what I meant by the PSX being nothing without the game, I meant the game FFVII. You cant play the PSX by itself. It HAS to have software to work.

Both of you admitted it was revolutionary just now. Of course with all your customary "only" and "but" but you still admitted that it was revolutionary. It doesnt matter if it only did one or two things in your eyes. It STILL did it.

I am not talking about other games. I realized there were other 3D games before FFVII. What I am pointing out is that FFVII REVOLUTIONIZED FINAL FANTASY. Name a FF that was 3D before FFVII. Or that had full motion video. Name one.

True, if VIII was the first 3D, it woulda been revolutionary too.

It doesnt matter if you hate FFVII. Revolutionary doesnt always mean a good thing. But you cant sit there and say it wasnt revolutionary when it was.

I'll argue this all day. But Ive already won. You all have admitted it was revolutionary. So there ya go.

Okay, I'm going to approach this from a different angle.

It appears that everyone agrees that FFVII made great strides forward in the series in different areas, whether it be graphics, story or other areas. What seems to be the object of debate now is whether or not these advancements are revolutionary and can be attributed to FFVII. grim07, you keep saying that because people admit to these advancements, it proves they are revolutionary. You need to now show why they are revolutionary rather than advancements now. The reason people stopped posting or ignoring what you've previously written is because your responses can be summarized as "Everyone said that FFVII made advancements, and because I think these advancements are revolutionary I win.", when in fact you need to prove/explain why these are revolutionary versus advancements. You can't assume that an advancement is in and of itself a revolution, you have to prove that it is a revolution instead of an advancement or your arguement is null and void because you have failed to defend yourself properly.

And finally, please don't say "I win, you lose." or some variation thereof. There has been no definite winner or loser in this debate. That's why people were enjoying it earlier, because there were several opinions that were all valid. When you came in and said, "See, I'm right and you're wrong." and started ignoring what people wrote and wouldn't defend yourself in regards to their comments, people quit replying to the thread because it's like trying to debate with a brick wall, and that's annoying.

I'm to lazy to basically end up retyping what FM said so...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flying Mullet

Okay, I'm going to approach this from a different angle.

It appears that everyone agrees that FFVII made great strides forward in the series in different areas, whether it be graphics, story or other areas. What seems to be the object of debate now is whether or not these advancements are revolutionary and can be attributed to FFVII. grim07, you keep saying that because people admit to these advancements, it proves they are revolutionary. You need to now show why they are revolutionary rather than advancements now. The reason people stopped posting or ignoring what you've previously written is because your responses can be summarized as "Everyone said that FFVII made advancements, and because I think these advancements are revolutionary I win.", when in fact you need to prove/explain why these are revolutionary versus advancements. You can't assume that an advancement is in and of itself a revolution, you have to prove that it is a revolution instead of an advancement or your arguement is null and void because you have failed to defend yourself properly.

And finally, please don't say "I win, you lose." or some variation thereof. There has been no definite winner or loser in this debate. That's why people were enjoying it earlier, because there were several opinions that were all valid. When you came in and said, "See, I'm right and you're wrong." and started ignoring what people wrote and wouldn't defend yourself in regards to their comments, people quit replying to the thread because it's like trying to debate with a brick wall, and that's annoying.

---

What he said :spin:

FF7 put a lot of RPG's on the map.It was the first 3D RPG, with a nice story line.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by f f freak

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

Revolutionary is NOT a new word. Its been around forever

---

So it's been around since before the creation of the Earth?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

To the rest of you, it may have had "small" revolutionary features to you, it may have had many large ones, it doesn really matter. The bottom line was that it HAD revolutionary features, making IT revolutionary.

---

Every FF had "small" revolutianary features. So every FF was revolutionary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

and DID impact RPG's after it.

---

So did FFI

---

1. Dont be stupid.

2. Why do I keep having to repeat myself.

Final Fantasy revolutionized RPG's. Final Fantasy VII revolutionized Final Fantasy.

One thing that wasnt small about VII's revolutionary capacity was its graphics.

---

1. I wasn't being stupid. YOU were with your stupid "Revolutzionariz haz ben arund 4 eva!! LOLOLOLZ".

2. You're not repeating yourself. You keep changing your argument. First FFVII revolutionized RPG's. Then you changed to FFVII revolutionized the FF series. Next it'll probably be the whole frickin Universe!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Fonz

FF7 put a lot of RPG's on the map.It was the first 3D RPG, with a nice story line.

---

It was not the first 3D RPG....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

When man first landed on the moon, that was a revolutionary feat. We all knew it was going to happen one day, but that didnt make it any less revolutionary. Unless you think man going into outerspace ISNT revolutionary. And if you do, then there is no hope for you.

---

Did you just compare a Playstation game to the first man on the moon?
That was a horrible analogy.

People expected a man to go on the moon? You're quite old! Being able to remember what it was like in the 60s!


FF7 going 3D is nothing but an enhancement, just one step of a still growing path of evolution, and in 10 years no one will give a crap about it being revolutionary, it will just be another Final Fantasy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

Okay, it seems that no one looked at my earlier analogy.

When man first landed on the moon, that was a revolutionary feat. We all knew it was going to happen one day, but that didnt make it any less revolutionary. Unless you think man going into outerspace ISNT revolutionary. And if you do, then there is no hope for you.

Also, what I meant by the PSX being nothing without the game, I meant the game FFVII. You cant play the PSX by itself. It HAS to have software to work.

Both of you admitted it was revolutionary just now. Of course with all your customary "only" and "but" but you still admitted that it was revolutionary. It doesnt matter if it only did one or two things in your eyes. It STILL did it.

I am not talking about other games. I realized there were other 3D games before FFVII. What I am pointing out is that FFVII REVOLUTIONIZED FINAL FANTASY. Name a FF that was 3D before FFVII. Or that had full motion video. Name one.

True, if VIII was the first 3D, it woulda been revolutionary too.

It doesnt matter if you hate FFVII. Revolutionary doesnt always mean a good thing. But you cant sit there and say it wasnt revolutionary when it was.

I'll argue this all day. But Ive already won. You all have admitted it was revolutionary. So there ya go.

---

If I remember correctly, there is an FMV at the beginning of six, no?

I think you need to calm down. You're grabbing for straws.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by *~Dagger Trepe~*

If I remember correctly, there is an FMV at the beginning of six, no?

I think you need to calm down. You're grabbing for straws.

---

Only in the PSOne re-release. SNES FFVI had a cinematic-ish opening, but it wasn't Full Motion Video.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flying Mullet

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by *~Dagger Trepe~*

If I remember correctly, there is an FMV at the beginning of six, no?

I think you need to calm down. You're grabbing for straws.

---

Only in the PSOne re-release. SNES FFVI had a cinematic-ish opening, but it wasn't Full Motion Video.

---

Wasn't that released before FFVII?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by *~Dagger Trepe~*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flying Mullet

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by *~Dagger Trepe~*

If I remember correctly, there is an FMV at the beginning of six, no?

I think you need to calm down. You're grabbing for straws.

---

Only in the PSOne re-release. SNES FFVI had a cinematic-ish opening, but it wasn't Full Motion Video.

---

Wasn't that released before FFVII?

---

In the US, the PSOne release of FFVI (in Anthology) was 1999, two years after FFVII was released in 1997.

OH. My bad.

No worries.

1. No, I never changed my argument. Go back and re-read all my posts. I always said Final Fantasy revolutionized RPG's, Final Fantasy VII revolutionized Final Fantasy.

2. The analogy to the moon was correct, and can also be contributed to anything man was "expected" to do. It was always expected that our technology would take us into space. It was always expected that we would be able to build machines that would let us fly. It was always expected that our technology would advance. But that didnt make any of those things less revolutionary, and nethier should FF VII, being the first 3D FF, just because video games were "expected" to go that route.

3. The way it was revolutionized (and yes, you guys have said revolutionized, go back and read what you wrote) mostly is in the graphics. Its the first 3D FF. Plain and simple. Why argue that? THAT is revolutionary for the Final Fantasy series, as every single one AFTER that is 3D (cept for the old school remakes). True, it was "expected" to go 3D, but so was man expected to go into space. But Neil Armstrong is still revolutionary for being the first one, and FF VII is still revolutionary for being the first 3D FF. Nothing you can say or do will change that. Its revolutionary, no matter how small or big. No matter if it sucked or not, NO OTHER FF BEFORE IT LOOKED LIKE IT.

4. I win :) (and yes, thats just to spite you)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

2. The analogy to the moon was correct, and can also be contributed to anything man was "expected" to do. It was always expected that our technology would take us into space. It was always expected that we would be able to build machines that would let us fly. It was always expected that our technology would advance. But that didnt make any of those things less revolutionary, and nethier should FF VII, being the first 3D FF, just because video games were "expected" to go that route.

---

Trying to back that analogy is not working for you. Go back to 1000AD, and tell them that we're going to make it to the moon using rockets which let us fly. They'll probably call you some kind of witch/vampire/madman and kill you. In fact go back to when Sputnik was launched and say, "Hey! We'll beat them Ruskies to the moon!" and even then not everyone will believe you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

3. The way it was revolutionized (and yes, you guys have said revolutionized, go back and read what you wrote) mostly is in the graphics. Its the first 3D FF. Plain and simple. Why argue that? THAT is revolutionary for the Final Fantasy series, as every single one AFTER that is 3D (cept for the old school remakes). True, it was "expected" to go 3D, but so was man expected to go into space. But Neil Armstrong is still revolutionary for being the first one, and FF VII is still revolutionary for being the first 3D FF. Nothing you can say or do will change that. Its revolutionary, no matter how small or big. No matter if it sucked or not, NO OTHER FF BEFORE IT LOOKED LIKE IT.

---

That has nothing to do with FFVII though. That has to do with the revolutionary aspects of the PS1. In fact using your example... us actually getting to the moon wasn't important at all. What good has that done for us? What was revolutionary was that us going to the moon showed how revolutionary our rockets, and NASA was. Just as FFVII wasn't the actual revolution, it just showed how revolutionary the PS1 was.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

4. I win :) (and yes, thats just to spite you)

---

If your winning right now I can't imagine what you look like losing :rolleyes2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goldenboko

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

2. The analogy to the moon was correct, and can also be contributed to anything man was "expected" to do. It was always expected that our technology would take us into space. It was always expected that we would be able to build machines that would let us fly. It was always expected that our technology would advance. But that didnt make any of those things less revolutionary, and nethier should FF VII, being the first 3D FF, just because video games were "expected" to go that route.

---

Trying to back that analogy is not working for you. Go back to 1000AD, and tell them that we're going to make it to the moon using rockets which let us fly. They'll probably call you some kind of witch/vampire/madman and kill you. In fact go back to when Sputnik was launched and say, "Hey! We'll beat them Ruskies to the moon!" and even then not everyone will believe you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

3. The way it was revolutionized (and yes, you guys have said revolutionized, go back and read what you wrote) mostly is in the graphics. Its the first 3D FF. Plain and simple. Why argue that? THAT is revolutionary for the Final Fantasy series, as every single one AFTER that is 3D (cept for the old school remakes). True, it was "expected" to go 3D, but so was man expected to go into space. But Neil Armstrong is still revolutionary for being the first one, and FF VII is still revolutionary for being the first 3D FF. Nothing you can say or do will change that. Its revolutionary, no matter how small or big. No matter if it sucked or not, NO OTHER FF BEFORE IT LOOKED LIKE IT.

---

That has nothing to do with FFVII though. That has to do with the revolutionary aspects of the PS1. In fact using your example... us actually getting to the moon wasn't important at all. What good has that done for us? What was revolutionary was that us going to the moon showed how revolutionary our rockets, and NASA was. Just as FFVII wasn't the actual revolution, it just showed how revolutionary the PS1 was.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

4. I win :) (and yes, thats just to spite you)

---

If your winning right now I can't imagine what you look like losing :rolleyes2

---

I dont know what further to add. He thinks that us landing on the moon wasnt important. It was NASA showing off. I mean, forget the entire mankind exploring outer space, forget maybe finding another planet to live on.

So you continue to say that FF VII has 3D graphics because of the playstation. True. So? That doesnt change the fact that its the first 3D final fantasy. Like I said, I dont care if it was on the N64 first, it dont matter WHAT system, its STILL the first 3D FF. Plain and simple.

I broke down your bull:skull::skull::skull::skull: ps1 argument. face facts man. you cant get around it. ill put it in caps, so you can understand.

ITS THE FIRST 3D FINAL FANTASY.

Revolutionary. Yes.

I win. Again.

NEXT.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goldenboko

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

2. The analogy to the moon was correct, and can also be contributed to anything man was "expected" to do. It was always expected that our technology would take us into space. It was always expected that we would be able to build machines that would let us fly. It was always expected that our technology would advance. But that didnt make any of those things less revolutionary, and nethier should FF VII, being the first 3D FF, just because video games were "expected" to go that route.

---

Trying to back that analogy is not working for you. Go back to 1000AD, and tell them that we're going to make it to the moon using rockets which let us fly. They'll probably call you some kind of witch/vampire/madman and kill you. In fact go back to when Sputnik was launched and say, "Hey! We'll beat them Ruskies to the moon!" and even then not everyone will believe you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

3. The way it was revolutionized (and yes, you guys have said revolutionized, go back and read what you wrote) mostly is in the graphics. Its the first 3D FF. Plain and simple. Why argue that? THAT is revolutionary for the Final Fantasy series, as every single one AFTER that is 3D (cept for the old school remakes). True, it was "expected" to go 3D, but so was man expected to go into space. But Neil Armstrong is still revolutionary for being the first one, and FF VII is still revolutionary for being the first 3D FF. Nothing you can say or do will change that. Its revolutionary, no matter how small or big. No matter if it sucked or not, NO OTHER FF BEFORE IT LOOKED LIKE IT.

---

That has nothing to do with FFVII though. That has to do with the revolutionary aspects of the PS1. In fact using your example... us actually getting to the moon wasn't important at all. What good has that done for us? What was revolutionary was that us going to the moon showed how revolutionary our rockets, and NASA was. Just as FFVII wasn't the actual revolution, it just showed how revolutionary the PS1 was.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

4. I win :) (and yes, thats just to spite you)

---

If your winning right now I can't imagine what you look like losing :rolleyes2

---

I dont know what further to add. He thinks that us landing on the moon wasnt important. It was NASA showing off. I mean, forget the entire mankind exploring outer space, forget maybe finding another planet to live on.

So you continue to say that FF VII has 3D graphics because of the playstation. True. So? That doesnt change the fact that its the first 3D final fantasy. Like I said, I dont care if it was on the N64 first, it dont matter WHAT system, its STILL the first 3D FF. Plain and simple.

I broke down your bull:skull::skull::skull::skull: ps1 argument. face facts man. you cant get around it. ill put it in caps, so you can understand.

ITS THE FIRST 3D FINAL FANTASY.

Revolutionary. Yes.

I win. Again.

NEXT.

---

No you didn't. Not at all. In fact you didn't even read my statement, you're in such a rush to call bull at whatever I say and declare you win that you don't try and learn from the debate. Us being able to get to the moon is important. Us actually going to the moon isn't as important, have we gotten any resources from the moon? Or perhaps we've begun moving people there?

No we've gotten nothing revolutionary from the moon, what was important was us showing we can travel through space and land on other planets, moons, or whatever.

Now... The Final Fantasy VII's graphics were not revolutionary, because the game itself didn't give us those graphics, the PS1 did.

So what I was saying is...
The PS1 is to Final Fantasy VII's Graphics as
Shuttles and NASA are to the moonlanding

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

1. No, I never changed my argument. Go back and re-read all my posts. I always said Final Fantasy revolutionized RPG's, Final Fantasy VII revolutionized Final Fantasy.

2. The analogy to the moon was correct, and can also be contributed to anything man was "expected" to do. It was always expected that our technology would take us into space. It was always expected that we would be able to build machines that would let us fly. It was always expected that our technology would advance. But that didnt make any of those things less revolutionary, and nethier should FF VII, being the first 3D FF, just because video games were "expected" to go that route.

3. The way it was revolutionized (and yes, you guys have said revolutionized, go back and read what you wrote) mostly is in the graphics. Its the first 3D FF. Plain and simple. Why argue that? THAT is revolutionary for the Final Fantasy series, as every single one AFTER that is 3D (cept for the old school remakes). True, it was "expected" to go 3D, but so was man expected to go into space. But Neil Armstrong is still revolutionary for being the first one, and FF VII is still revolutionary for being the first 3D FF. Nothing you can say or do will change that. Its revolutionary, no matter how small or big. No matter if it sucked or not, NO OTHER FF BEFORE IT LOOKED LIKE IT.

4. I win :) (and yes, thats just to spite you)

---

I think you need to calm down. You're gonna pop a vain :rolleyes2

1. Landing on the moon is revolutionary. I'm afraid 3-D game graphic DON'T make a game revolutionary. What if the gameplay sucked? That goes out the window.

2. Don't be so defensive. We're trying to be civil and you're making it hard. :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

I dont know what further to add. He thinks that us landing on the moon wasnt important. It was NASA showing off. I mean, forget the entire mankind exploring outer space, forget maybe finding another planet to live on.

---

That argument would hold a lot more water IF any of it were true. Only a few people have ever been to outer space, and how many other planets do humans inhabit? Plus, if NASA weren't showing off, they wouldn't have bothered televising it all around the world.

Quote:

---

So you continue to say that FF VII has 3D graphics because of the playstation. True. So? That doesnt change the fact that its the first 3D final fantasy. Like I said, I dont care if it was on the N64 first, it dont matter WHAT system, its STILL the first 3D FF. Plain and simple.

---

Holy crap, I completely forgot about the N64 demo! You just tossed whatever traces of credibility you had left out the window by saying that. See, we're debating FACTS, not OPINIONS. If you don't care about [fact X], that's an opinion. Trying to counter facts with opinions is like going at a dragon with a toothpick. You're gonna lose. The fact is, VII is NOT the first 3D FF ever made. It is only the first 3D FF to be released as a full game. It is not revolutionary. Full stop. Na na na na, na na na, hey hey hey, goodbye. You can stick your fingers in your ears and say, "I don't care" all you like, but it's not going to change the facts

Quote:

---

I broke down your bull:skull::skull::skull::skull: ps1 argument.

---

No you didn't. You just repeated your opinion and said you broke it down.

Quote:

---

face facts man. you cant get around it.

---

No, you haven't used any conclusive facts, now that you've disproved your own "it was the first 3D FF" claim.

Quote:

---

ill put it in caps, so you can understand.

ITS THE FIRST 3D FINAL FANTASY.

Revolutionary. Yes.

I win. Again. NEXT.

---

Whatever. If you want to believe you won, go ahead. Maybe if you do, you'll go away.

1. There was no N64 demo. FF VII was released on Playstation only. And PC later on. Thats it. So yeah, its the first 3D FF.

2. So, the Playstation takes the credit for FFVII's graphics? FF VII had NOTHING to do with how it look, it was all the system, hm? Do you have any idea how a game is made? If what you are saying is true, then ALL Playstation games would look the same. And they dont. Its the first 3D FF. Get used to it.

3. Back to the moon thing. It was revolutionary. We HAVE sent more then just " a few" men into space since then: As of June 13, 2007, a total of 460 humans from 39 countries have gone into space according to the FAI guideline, while 466 people qualify under the U.S. definition. Of those totals, 456 people have reached Earth orbit or beyond and 24 people have traveled beyond Low Earth Orbit. Space travelers have spent over 30,000 person-days (or a cumulative total of over 82 years) in space, including over 100 person-days of spacewalks.

4. The benefit of landing on the moon was so we could explore and see what the moons surface is like, and whether or not it was inhabitable for humans.

5. None of that changes the fact that FF VII is THE FIRST 3D FF IN THE SERIES. NOTHING YOU CAN SAY WILL CHANGE THAT.

I'll go on and on and on, until this thing is closed, just like the Aeris/Aerith argument.

6. NEXT!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

1. There was no N64 demo.

---

YouTube - Final Fantasy Tech Demo N64

You were saying?

grim07, you're making me laugh now because you keep acting like you've proven your points and are offering up irrefutable evidence and facts, yet you are as far from it as possible.

I think what my man grim is trying to say is that FFVII set the trend for the following FF's. By no means was it 'expected' to go 3d as a 'natural progression', DQ (which birthed FF) only went 3d 2 years ago, and there are countless rpgs during and after VII's time that are 2d.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

I think what my man grim is trying to say is that FFVII set the trend for the following FF's. By no means was it 'expected' to go 3d as a 'natural progression', DQ (which birthed FF) only went 3d 2 years ago, and there are countless rpgs during and after VII's time that are 2d.

---

Except for the fact that there was a SGI demo years before FFVII was released. Can you honestly say that you didn't expect FF to go 3D? Note that Dragon Quest and Final Fantasy are indeed two separate franchises.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Griff

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

1. There was no N64 demo.

---

YouTube - Final Fantasy Tech Demo N64

You were saying?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

2. So, the Playstation takes the credit for FFVII's graphics? FF VII had NOTHING to do with how it look, it was all the system, hm? Do you have any idea how a game is made? If what you are saying is true, then ALL Playstation games would look the same. And they dont. Its the first 3D FF. Get used to it.

---

Again you disregard my analogy. The PS1 gave FFVII the capability to make advanced 3D graphics. Besides the 1st 3D FF is hardly "revolutionary". 3D was not some crazy far out idea. I can go all the way back to a game called Sonic 3D Blast on the Sega Genesis to find 3D games. Being the first at something isn't always revolutionary, lots of times its not even good. Look at Sonic's popularity, its 3D games have NEVER been as successful as its 2D games, nor has they're jump to 3D been conisdered revolutionary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

3. Back to the moon thing. It was revolutionary. We HAVE sent more then just " a few" men into space since then: As of June 13, 2007, a total of 460 humans from 39 countries have gone into space according to the FAI guideline, while 466 people qualify under the U.S. definition. Of those totals, 456 people have reached Earth orbit or beyond and 24 people have traveled beyond Low Earth Orbit. Space travelers have spent over 30,000 person-days (or a cumulative total of over 82 years) in space, including over 100 person-days of spacewalks.

4. The benefit of landing on the moon was so we could explore and see what the moons surface is like, and whether or not it was inhabitable for humans.

---

Again, please read my argument before trying to refute it. I said getting to the moon wasn't the actually revolutionary part, NASA showing its capabilities was, which is much like how FFVII isn't the actual revolutionary part, PS1's capabilities are. But really I'm done with this moonman argument because it has very little to do with the subject, it was more or less you not reading my analogy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

5. None of that changes the fact that FF VII is THE FIRST 3D FF IN THE SERIES. NOTHING YOU CAN SAY WILL CHANGE THAT.

---

I haven't tried to change that. That was NEVER my side of the argument. My argument has been testing the revolutionary aspect of it being in 3D, and you've done very little to convince me that it is revolutionary. 3D had been done before, and 3D is not always success.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

I think what my man grim is trying to say is that FFVII set the trend for the following FF's. By no means was it 'expected' to go 3d as a 'natural progression', DQ (which birthed FF) only went 3d 2 years ago, and there are countless rpgs during and after VII's time that are 2d.

---

That doesn't seem like what he's saying, but at the same time, setting a trend is hardly revolutionary. FFIV set a trend for storytelling, FFI started a trend for gameplay. They've all started trends, MORE is needed for it to be revolutionary.

A final piece of my argument. You defined revolutionary as a sudden drastic change. 3D wasn't a sudden drastic change in the gaming world, many other games had 3D graphics before, so it wasn't very sudden or drastic at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

1. There was no N64 demo. FF VII was released on Playstation only. And PC later on. Thats it. So yeah, its the first 3D FF.

2. So, the Playstation takes the credit for FFVII's graphics? FF VII had NOTHING to do with how it look, it was all the system, hm? Do you have any idea how a game is made? If what you are saying is true, then ALL Playstation games would look the same. And they dont. Its the first 3D FF. Get used to it.

3. Back to the moon thing. It was revolutionary. We HAVE sent more then just " a few" men into space since then: As of June 13, 2007, a total of 460 humans from 39 countries have gone into space according to the FAI guideline, while 466 people qualify under the U.S. definition. Of those totals, 456 people have reached Earth orbit or beyond and 24 people have traveled beyond Low Earth Orbit. Space travelers have spent over 30,000 person-days (or a cumulative total of over 82 years) in space, including over 100 person-days of spacewalks.

4. The benefit of landing on the moon was so we could explore and see what the moons surface is like, and whether or not it was inhabitable for humans.

5. None of that changes the fact that FF VII is THE FIRST 3D FF IN THE SERIES. NOTHING YOU CAN SAY WILL CHANGE THAT.

I'll go on and on and on, until this thing is closed, just like the Aeris/Aerith argument.

6. NEXT!

---

Dude. What does the moon have to do with FFVII? NO CORRELATION.

And also, Final Fantasy VII was NOT the first 3-D game ever, correct? Therefore, even if it is the first for Final Fantasy VII, that doesn't make it revolutionary.

The only thing that makes this game revolutionary is how many people raved about it and it boosted the series. It is still my favorite Final Fantasy game because of the story.

Wow, you guys keep thinking Im saying that FF VII revolutionized RPG's. I know it wasnt the first 3D game. Besided, that was a tech demo, much like the PS3 tech demo, and it showed FFVI characters, it had nothing to do with FFVII, and you couldnt even play it.

I'll repeat myself for the upteenth time.

FINAL FANTASY VII WAS THE FIRST 3D FINAL FANTASY GAME. THAT IS NEW AND REVOLUTIONARY FOR THE FINAL FANTASY SERIES. IT DOESNT MATTER IF GAMES WERE EXPECTED TO GO THAT ROUTE, IT WAS STILL THE FIRST IN THE FINAL FANTASY SERIES.

FINAL FANTASY VII REVOLUTIONIZED FINAL FANTASY. NOT VIDEO GAMES.

Do you dumbsmurfs honestly understand what Im saying now?

I have never had to deal with a more hardheaded stubborn crowd. Final Fantasy VII being the first FINAL FANTASY that is 3D and the first FINAL FANTASY on CD, makes it revolutionary for the FINAL FANTASY SERIES.

:rolleyes2

No it doesn't. 3D isn't that revolutionary. Its not a huge drastic change in the way games are played. You've yet to tell me anything that makes me think it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

Wow, you guys keep thinking Im saying that FF VII revolutionized RPG's. I know it wasnt the first 3D game. Besided, that was a tech demo, much like the PS3 tech demo, and it showed FFVI characters, it had nothing to do with FFVII, and you couldnt even play it.

I'll repeat myself for the upteenth time.

FINAL FANTASY VII WAS THE FIRST 3D FINAL FANTASY GAME. THAT IS NEW AND REVOLUTIONARY FOR THE FINAL FANTASY SERIES. IT DOESNT MATTER IF GAMES WERE EXPECTED TO GO THAT ROUTE, IT WAS STILL THE FIRST IN THE FINAL FANTASY SERIES.

FINAL FANTASY VII REVOLUTIONIZED FINAL FANTASY. NOT VIDEO GAMES.

Do you dumbsmurfs honestly understand what Im saying now?

I have never had to deal with a more hardheaded stubborn crowd. Final Fantasy VII being the first FINAL FANTASY that is 3D and the first FINAL FANTASY on CD, makes it revolutionary for the FINAL FANTASY SERIES.

:rolleyes2

---

How are we dumbsmurfs? You're the one who keeps screaming your lungs out to prove a point that can't be proven because it's all a matter of opinion.

If someone doesn't want to believe that Final Fantasy VII is revolutionary, they WON'T. If someone wants to believe VIII is, then they will.

revolutionary - Definitions from Dictionary.com

Your telling me that FF VII's change to 3D graphics was NOT a sudden, COMPLETE, or MARKED change in the FF series? Is that what your telling me? I dont give two flying smurfs if thats where games were heading. Im not talking about video games. Im talking about the FINAL FANTASY SERIES. What game, from I-VI, looks 3D to you. Honestly.

Are all of you this smurfin stupid? I mean...is it THAT hard to get it through your head? Just admit it! Or get a mod to close this so I dont have to keep repeating myself.

You keep saying "Oh, its the playstation that gave FF VII its graphics." And I say "So? I dont give a :skull::skull::skull::skull: WHAT gave it its graphics, it STILL HAD THE GRAPHICS. No other FF before it had them. The rest of FF VII'S revolutionary capability is all a matter of opinion from storyline to characters and whatnot, but the biggest, drastic CHANGE (see deff. of revolutionary) was the graphics of FFVII. Thats it. No where in that deff. does it say "Sudden, Complete, or Marked change, unless it was expected to go that route" it doesnt say that. It says "Sudden complete or marked change." Nothing about NEW change. SUDDEN COMPLETE OR MARKED. Being the first 3D FF makes that a COMPLETE MARKED AND SUDDEN CHANGE FOR THE FF SERIES.

We can keep goin all day. I provided the evidence and the proof, and its NOT opinionated, its RIGHT there in your smurfin face when you turn the game on. Play FF I-VI, then play VII. TELL ME that VII looks like all of them. Go ahead. tell me. CAUSE YOU CANT. ITS IRREFUTABLE FACT. EVIDENCE. PROOF. RIGHT IN YOUR FACE.

NEXT.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

Wow, you guys keep thinking Im saying that FF VII revolutionized RPG's. I know it wasnt the first 3D game. Besided, that was a tech demo, much like the PS3 tech demo, and it showed FFVI characters, it had nothing to do with FFVII, and you couldnt even play it.

I'll repeat myself for the upteenth time.

FINAL FANTASY VII WAS THE FIRST 3D FINAL FANTASY GAME. THAT IS NEW AND REVOLUTIONARY FOR THE FINAL FANTASY SERIES. IT DOESNT MATTER IF GAMES WERE EXPECTED TO GO THAT ROUTE, IT WAS STILL THE FIRST IN THE FINAL FANTASY SERIES.

FINAL FANTASY VII REVOLUTIONIZED FINAL FANTASY. NOT VIDEO GAMES.

Do you dumbsmurfs honestly understand what Im saying now?

I have never had to deal with a more hardheaded stubborn crowd. Final Fantasy VII being the first FINAL FANTASY that is 3D and the first FINAL FANTASY on CD, makes it revolutionary for the FINAL FANTASY SERIES.

:rolleyes2

---

WRONG, the SGI demo clearly shows that the choices in the game are being made via mouse movement. So FFVII was NOT the first FF game to be in a 3D environment. The SGI demo being made showed players that the game was headed towards 3D, so the 3D part of what turned out to be FFVII was not unexpected nor revolutionary.


Also the fact that it was on CD is not revolutionary, a CD is a storage device and that's all.

1. YOU need to calm down, buddy. The graphics to Final Fantasy was not even revolutionary to the series because it was not the first 3-D game. You say it's revolutionary to Final Fantasy and only Final Fantasy. That's not the case. If it was only revolutionary to Final Fantasy, then it can't be considered revolutionary at all.

radically new or innovative; outside or beyond established procedure, principles-THAT is revolutionary. Was the whole world swooning over FFVII graphics? Hardly!

I'm going to get a mod to close this thread so that you can stop babbling.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

revolutionary - Definitions from Dictionary.com

Your telling me that FF VII's change to 3D graphics was NOT a sudden, COMPLETE, or MARKED change in the FF series? Is that what your telling me? I dont give two flying smurfs if thats where games were heading. Im not talking about video games. Im talking about the FINAL FANTASY SERIES. What game, from I-VI, looks 3D to you. Honestly.

Are all of you this smurfin stupid? I mean...is it THAT hard to get it through your head? Just admit it! Or get a mod to close this so I dont have to keep repeating myself.

You keep saying "Oh, its the playstation that gave FF VII its graphics." And I say "So? I dont give a :skull::skull::skull::skull: WHAT gave it its graphics, it STILL HAD THE GRAPHICS. No other FF before it had them. The rest of FF VII'S revolutionary capability is all a matter of opinion from storyline to characters and whatnot, but the biggest, drastic CHANGE (see deff. of revolutionary) was the graphics of FFVII. Thats it. No where in that deff. does it say "Sudden, Complete, or Marked change, unless it was expected to go that route" it doesnt say that. It says "Sudden complete or marked change." Nothing about NEW change. SUDDEN COMPLETE OR MARKED. Being the first 3D FF makes that a COMPLETE MARKED AND SUDDEN CHANGE FOR THE FF SERIES.

We can keep goin all day. I provided the evidence and the proof, and its NOT opinionated, its RIGHT there in your smurfin face when you turn the game on. Play FF I-VI, then play VII. TELL ME that VII looks like all of them. Go ahead. tell me. CAUSE YOU CANT. ITS IRREFUTABLE FACT. EVIDENCE. PROOF. RIGHT IN YOUR FACE.

NEXT.

---

FFVI's mode 7 (I believe thats what its called), was a beginning of 3D and there was that demo shown before showing it was going to go into a 3D change, so its not a "sudden" change. Also change is not always revolutionary. As for complete, its not complete Mode 7 was the beginning of 3D.

Also, there is no way you could just disregard what everything else is doing when your talking about revolutionary. The Atom bomb was a revolutionary weapon when the US first made it, but it wouldn't be revolutionary anymore if a different country made it.

If you say the switch to 3D was revolutionary just because it was change, then you'd have to agree that FFIV was revolutionary because it changed the way Final Fantasy told their storyline, and because of it introducing the ATB system.

Just so you know, it's Mode 7, and it started in IV.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Galvatron

Just so you know, it's Mode 7, and it started in IV.

---

I couldn't remember if it was 7 or 8 thanks! I said FFVI, because VI took it to a higher level with actual up and down movement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goldenboko

3D wasn't a sudden drastic change in the gaming world, many other games had 3D graphics before

---

of course not, but this thread is about the series. even though you're still wrong in that there were no graphics like VII's in the gaming world at the time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Galvatron

Except for the fact that there was a SGI demo years before FFVII was released. Can you honestly say that you didn't expect FF to go 3D? Note that Dragon Quest and Final Fantasy are indeed two separate franchises.

---

the demo is irrelevant to the topic of this thread. 3d models over pre-rendered backgrounds tilted at any given angle is a drastic change from the previous games which was continued even to X. It revolutionized the series.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

the demo is irrelevant to the topic of this thread. 3d models over pre-rendered backgrounds tilted at any given angle is a drastic change from the previous games which was continued even to X. It revolutionized the series.

---

The demo is relevant, you said that FF going 3D was not expected and was drastic, the demo showed that the series was OBVIOUSLY going 3D, so FF7 should have not been a surprise.

you know what, i give up. no amount of reasoning will tell you guys otherwise. you can all live in your fantasy world where video game series becoming 3D for the first time isnt revolutionary, what the smurf ever.

im leaving. and Im not coming back. your all a bunch of ignorant smurfs who cant understand one simple concept, and im tired of explaining it to you. you can walk around on the street and talk to fellow ff fans and try to tell them that vii wasnt revolutionary. that it was the same as all the other ff's. the nothing changed. see how much you get laughed at.

bye smurfers. have a nice life.

All I can say is... wow. Take things a bit seriously? You've explained nothing to us, and have only restated the same thing over and over again. Now perhaps you shouldn't get so worked up when someone has a different opinion then you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

you know what, i give up. no amount of reasoning will tell you guys otherwise. you can all live in your fantasy world where video game series becoming 3D for the first time isnt revolutionary, what the smurf ever.

---

What people are trying to say is that the 3D tech demo using the FFVI cast came out long before FFVII, thus making the 3D graphics in FFVII neither unexpected or a radical change, since everyone knew they would be coming because of the tech demo.

Quote:

---

you know what, i give up. no amount of reasoning will tell you guys otherwise. you can all live in your fantasy world where video game series becoming 3D for the first time isnt revolutionary, what the smurf ever.

im leaving. and Im not coming back. your all a bunch of ignorant smurfs who cant understand one simple concept, and im tired of explaining it to you. you can walk around on the street and talk to fellow ff fans and try to tell them that vii wasnt revolutionary. that it was the same as all the other ff's. the nothing changed. see how much you get laughed at.

bye smurfers. have a nice life.

---

Uh oh. I smell fanboy.

I don't think FFVII revolotionized anything except for FMVs, really. FFVI did alot more work. Airships, chocobos, and the stuff got more revlotionized. The world map was in psudo-3D. The cast didn't contain of jobs but you got to make your own jobs, but couldn't revert them. Had better quality music than any of the other SNES games I have ever played. Really good synths. I loved the Pan Flute on the world map.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

you know what, i give up. no amount of reasoning will tell you guys otherwise. you can all live in your fantasy world where video game series becoming 3D for the first time isnt revolutionary, what the smurf ever.

im leaving. and Im not coming back. your all a bunch of ignorant smurfs who cant understand one simple concept, and im tired of explaining it to you. you can walk around on the street and talk to fellow ff fans and try to tell them that vii wasnt revolutionary. that it was the same as all the other ff's. the nothing changed. see how much you get laughed at.

bye smurfers. have a nice life.

---

Well, that's EoFF for ya BUD.

You have a nice life also.

Quote:

---

you know what, i give up. no amount of reasoning will tell you guys otherwise. you can all live in your fantasy world where video game series becoming 3D for the first time isnt revolutionary, what the smurf ever.

im leaving. and Im not coming back. your all a bunch of ignorant smurfs who cant understand one simple concept, and im tired of explaining it to you. you can walk around on the street and talk to fellow ff fans and try to tell them that vii wasnt revolutionary. that it was the same as all the other ff's. the nothing changed. see how much you get laughed at.

bye smurfers. have a nice life.

---

grim07, don't you think you're being a little immature? I mean, people all have different opinions, and you can never change that. The whole point of a debate, I think, is to maturely prove your point. That doesn't include saying "I win, you lose!" or something to that extent, or insulting people.
Sorry if i sound like a mod. I didn't mean to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

you know what, i give up. no amount of reasoning will tell you guys otherwise. you can all live in your fantasy world where video game series becoming 3D for the first time isnt revolutionary, what the smurf ever.

im leaving. and Im not coming back. your all a bunch of ignorant smurfs who cant understand one simple concept, and im tired of explaining it to you. you can walk around on the street and talk to fellow ff fans and try to tell them that vii wasnt revolutionary. that it was the same as all the other ff's. the nothing changed. see how much you get laughed at.

bye smurfers. have a nice life.

---

Good riddance, imo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grim07

you know what, i give up. no amount of reasoning will tell you guys otherwise. you can all live in your fantasy world where video game series becoming 3D for the first time isnt revolutionary, what the smurf ever.

im leaving. and Im not coming back. your all a bunch of ignorant smurfs who cant understand one simple concept, and im tired of explaining it to you. you can walk around on the street and talk to fellow ff fans and try to tell them that vii wasnt revolutionary. that it was the same as all the other ff's. the nothing changed. see how much you get laughed at.

bye smurfers. have a nice life.

---

So people disprove your point about FF7 being an unexpected and drastic change with the SGI thing, and you just stomp off like a little kid? We never said that FF7 was the same as all the other FF games, EVERY FF game is different from the ones before it.

Yeah this thread is now gone.

Oh, and grim07, not that it matters 'cause you've left forever and all (despite being online two and a half hours after making that post. I guess you had a lot of goodbyes to say or something! :)), if you ever do come back, consider this a warning for flaming.