How much did Final Fantasy VII revolutionise the series?

[grim07]

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 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.

[Goldenboko]

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

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.

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


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.

[Avarice-ness]

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

[Wolf Kanno]

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. 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.

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.

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 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 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.

[Dr. Acula]

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.
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!
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.

[Flying Mullet]

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

Might I also add that we're talking about the game, Final Fantasy VII. Not the Sony Playstation. I dont give a 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.

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.

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.

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.

[grim07]

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.

[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.

[Timerk]

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

[Flying Mullet]

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.

[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

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.

[Avarice-ness]

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.

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.

[Flying Mullet]

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*

[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.

[Bolivar]

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.