Page 4 of 10 FirstFirst 12345678910 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 142

Thread: How much did Final Fantasy VII revolutionise the series?

  1. #46
    ♥ Mayor of Zozo Avarice-ness's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Feasting on Chocobo's in Zozo
    Posts
    5,298

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bolivar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Avarice-ness View Post
    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 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Avarice-ness View Post
    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*

    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.
    Last edited by Avarice-ness; 07-11-2007 at 07:19 PM.

  2. #47

    Default

    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.

  3. #48
    Bolivar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    6,131
    Articles
    3
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Avarice-ness View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Bolivar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Avarice-ness View Post
    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 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Avarice-ness View Post
    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*

    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?
    Last edited by Bolivar; 07-11-2007 at 09:02 PM.

  4. #49
    Shadow Master Griff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    880

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grim07 View Post
    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.

    Which FF Character Are You?


    (SPOILER) This Signature STILL contains spoilers

  5. #50

    Default

    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).
    Please feel free to read my take on the official novalisation of Dissidia Final Fantasy at this link:

    http://www.fanfiction.net/s/5580755/..._You_Fight_For

  6. #51
    Memento Mori Site Contributor Wolf Kanno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Nowhere and Everywhere
    Posts
    19,544
    Articles
    60
    Blog Entries
    27
    Contributions
    • Former Cid's Knight

    Default Surprised this hasn't devolved into fist fights...

    Quote Originally Posted by Bolivar View Post
    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 View Post

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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 View Post
    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

  7. #52
    Old school, like an old fool. Flying Mullet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Napping in a peach tree.
    Posts
    19,185
    Articles
    6
    Blog Entries
    7
    Contributions
    • Former Administrator
    • Former Cid's Knight
    • Former Senior Site Staff

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno View Post
    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?"
    Figaro Castle

  8. #53
    Lightning Fast Speed! Hyperion4444's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Paradise
    Posts
    726

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Griff View Post
    You may all continue with the ripping out of each other's throats.
    lol

  9. #54

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bipper View Post
    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?

  10. #55

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboko View Post
    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.

  11. #56
    Bolivar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    6,131
    Articles
    3
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno View Post
    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 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.

  12. #57
    Gold is the new black Goldenboko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    16,136
    Articles
    39
    Blog Entries
    1
    Contributions
    • Former Editor
    • Hosted the Ciddies

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grim07 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboko View Post
    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.

  13. #58
    Queen of the BushHags Takara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    BushHagville
    Posts
    1,760

    Default

    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

  14. #59

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by *~Dagger Trepe~* View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by bipper View Post
    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

  15. #60
    Memento Mori Site Contributor Wolf Kanno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Nowhere and Everywhere
    Posts
    19,544
    Articles
    60
    Blog Entries
    27
    Contributions
    • Former Cid's Knight

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bolivar View Post
    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.

    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"

    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.

    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.

    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...

    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.


    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.

    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...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •