For the most part I agree that the author's comment about "selective remakes" was a bit out of line. I would also like to note that Edge is a European Gaming publication (a very good one at that. I'm starting to like European journalism) so the focus on VII in the article can be somewhat understood.

I went back and saw that I was mistakened though. The author did like the remake for III and saw it to be necessary since it was never released outside of Japan. Though the author does have issues with the games older game engine. The author says IV is a "solid" game in the series and is intrigued by the idea of extra story content but he feels the game is not a major seller that will appeal to a new audiance. It's appeal is sorely for those who played the original. I persoanlly disagree but whatever.:rolleyes2 His main beef is with the steady flow of FFI and II remakes.

His arguments about Crisis Core and Revnant Wings are understandable though. (I'm starting really wish I can find a link to the article on their website but alas no...) He describes Revnant Wings as a mockery of what XII stood for (the allusions of Revnant Wings being XII what X-2 was to X are in most reviews I've heard for the game. I'll save my personal judgement for when I play it though .) and his thoughts on Crisis Core are similiar to my own argument about the Compilation and sequels in general. The game looks pretty but it doesn't look like it's adding anything to the VII mythos. Rather it's story seems like a departure to what VII stood for.

I'll definetly be playing Revnant Wings but I doubt I'll play Crisis Core since the game seems like a retelling of VII's plot with Sephiroth being a good guy this time. Also Zack seems radically different from what I'm used to seeing which kinda bothers me. Overall, it just doesn't appeal to me. I also look forward to the IV remake since it's one of my favorites in the series. I am also intrigued with Dissidia but that's just because the game has always been a fanboy fantasy of mine.