IGN's Top 100 RPG's of All Time

[Bolivar]

Wow, Wolf. That was a pretty intense post. I gotta give you some props for that one. Because that's what you want, isn't it? A little attention and praise for what a smart gamer you are? There's only one problem:

You're wrong in almost every feasible way a human being could possibly be wrong.

First, I don't think the measuring stick for whether art drew somebody into a work is if they wrote about it in a magazine or talked about it at length.

And your whole New Game+ argument, again, is a red herring. No one contested that CT has multiple endings. The issue is that CT can be completed, with all of the side content for that playthrough exhausted, in around 30-35 hours. About the same or less the time it takes just to complete the main story alone in PlayStation RPGs.

And Xenogears... ah, yes, sweet Xenogears. Is it overrated? Of course. And it's lacking elements can be demonstrably proven to the extent that only reaching arguments can be raised in its defense. It's not the "far and away" best game out of the PlayStation, Platinum Age of RPGs (I'm coining it). But it's still in that same circle of classics. I can't dispute that. The game missed a lot of basics for me, but it also nailed a lot of the more ambitious stuff so well

I also don't think FFVII shares CT's rationale for hype, that people played it when they were 8. The PlayStation console at the time was marketed for the aging gaming population, teens and young adults, and went a long way towards bringing game consoles out of the closet with the action figures and board games and into the entertainment system, connected to the surround sound.

Fallacy. Whether BoB likes FFXIII or not has no bearing on the capacity to look at FFVI in a reasonable way.

And I don't think my expectations have much to do with my capacity, neither. I read people on this board say DQV was the best in the series before I played it. I may agree with them. I can't say the same about FFVI.

The whole fact that "this is an American list" is also off-topic. I'm not saying we should care what the Japanese think. I'm just accounting for how a community, who could not have played half of VI's predecessors, could come out and say "WOW I CAN'T BELIEVE THIS GAME CAME OUT OF NOWHERE AND DID SO MANY AMAZING THINGS!!!!1"

Anyway, the list is weird. I disagree with it. And I'm not sure why I care about it anymore...

[Depression Moon]

IX AT 88? THEY MUST BE SMOKIN'!

[Loony BoB]

BoB, we've already determined that you are a basket case cause you actually feel FFXIII is a great game, so I am simply going to ignore all of this.

I never said FFXIII is one of the best games, and I'm not sure if I've actually said it was 'great'. I do believe that the character grouping is arguably the best ever, the time spent showing us each character is the best ever, and that (most notably) it is a good game, not a crap one. You just seem to think that anyone who disagrees with you saying FFXIII is crap seems to have some insane obligation to state that it is a great game, one of the best, etc, when really they can just like the game without seeing it as one of the all time greats.

I know you're issue with the game is due to overblown hype and the viscous VI vs VII blood feud so I don't really expect for you to appreciate the games true strength, but whatever. I'm pretty sure BoB is in the same boat, though I am also sure it's cause his game style preference is heavy linear storytelling so VI's open-endedness and lacking a strong lead for an ensemble cast is also an issue for him.

Actually, I don't like heavily linear storytelling although I don't think you need a strong lead for an ensemble cast. FFXIII is very linear, yes, and I would prefer a game to be less linear. But there is reason behind it for FFXIII, there is reason you don't return to old areas (often), etc. I actually criticised FFX for being too linear earlier on, and it's less linear than FFXIII, but it doesn't have any reason to be linear in the first place as far as I'm concerned. As for the strong lead thing, I don't really think many leads in many FF games have been incredibly strong. I disliked Tidus, I wasn't a fan of Vaan (yes, I know you could consider Ashe to be the lead, but that's a whole different debate), Bartz isn't exactly the most inspiring lead ever, Squall is "...", Lightning isn't the best... although I will point out that Lightning is barely the lead in FFXIII. It's an ensemble cast, just like FFVI, only the characters are given much, much more time than VI's cast are - such is the way for every more recent game as they can allow more lines of script and more cinematic sequences every generation. As for linearity, this is a gameplay issue more than a story issue as far as I'm concerned. Otherwise one could argue that VI's (and pretty much every other FF's) story is just as linear. All the key points happen in order, as they do with pretty much any JRPG ever made.

As for my preferred style, the fact that VII, VIII, V and XII are there alongside XIII as my preferred Final Fantasy games pretty much says that linearity is not my preference.

I've almost finished FFVI now! Got the six dragons (two left are in Kefka's Tower) and all espers and every character has every spell available at the moment (exception: Just got Raiden/Quick now, so am still working on a few characters for that, but not heavily bothered). So basically, Kefka's Tower and then I'm golden for FFIX. The gameplay in VI is great, I just find the story scenes to be average. That opera scene is nothing short of boring for me. General Leo remains my preferred character in the game, and... yeah.

EDIT: Wow, FFVI's final dungeon was shockingly easy. xD I guess putting all spells on all characters = overpowering?

[Psychotic]

No BAoTW Forever?

smurf you, IGN. I'm pulling my ads from your website for this.

[NeoCracker]

BoB, we've already determined that you are a basket case cause you actually feel FFXIII is a great game, so I am simply going to ignore all of this.

I never said FFXIII is one of the best games, and I'm not sure if I've actually said it was 'great'. I do believe that the character grouping is arguably the best ever, the time spent showing us each character is the best ever, and that (most notably) it is a good game, not a crap one. You just seem to think that anyone who disagrees with you saying FFXIII is crap seems to have some insane obligation to state that it is a great game, one of the best, etc, when really they can just like the game without seeing it as one of the all time greats.

I know you're issue with the game is due to overblown hype and the viscous VI vs VII blood feud so I don't really expect for you to appreciate the games true strength, but whatever. I'm pretty sure BoB is in the same boat, though I am also sure it's cause his game style preference is heavy linear storytelling so VI's open-endedness and lacking a strong lead for an ensemble cast is also an issue for him.

Actually, I don't like heavily linear storytelling although I don't think you need a strong lead for an ensemble cast. FFXIII is very linear, yes, and I would prefer a game to be less linear. But there is reason behind it for FFXIII, there is reason you don't return to old areas (often), etc. I actually criticised FFX for being too linear earlier on, and it's less linear than FFXIII, but it doesn't have any reason to be linear in the first place as far as I'm concerned. As for the strong lead thing, I don't really think many leads in many FF games have been incredibly strong. I disliked Tidus, I wasn't a fan of Vaan (yes, I know you could consider Ashe to be the lead, but that's a whole different debate), Bartz isn't exactly the most inspiring lead ever, Squall is "...", Lightning isn't the best... although I will point out that Lightning is barely the lead in FFXIII. It's an ensemble cast, just like FFVI, only the characters are given much, much more time than VI's cast are - such is the way for every more recent game as they can allow more lines of script and more cinematic sequences every generation. As for linearity, this is a gameplay issue more than a story issue as far as I'm concerned. Otherwise one could argue that VI's (and pretty much every other FF's) story is just as linear. All the key points happen in order, as they do with pretty much any JRPG ever made.

As for my preferred style, the fact that VII, VIII, V and XII are there alongside XIII as my preferred Final Fantasy games pretty much says that linearity is not my preference.

I've almost finished FFVI now! Got the six dragons (two left are in Kefka's Tower) and all espers and every character has every spell available at the moment (exception: Just got Raiden/Quick now, so am still working on a few characters for that, but not heavily bothered). So basically, Kefka's Tower and then I'm golden for FFIX. The gameplay in VI is great, I just find the story scenes to be average. That opera scene is nothing short of boring for me. General Leo remains my preferred character in the game, and... yeah.

EDIT: Wow, FFVI's final dungeon was shockingly easy. xD I guess putting all spells on all characters = overpowering?

What FF isn't shockingly easy?

[Laddy]

Tactics.

[NeoCracker]

And IV DS. ;P

[Depression Moon]

III pisses me the hell off towards the end! still haven't beaten it.

[Wolf Kanno]

BoB - You know damn well I'm just trolling you.

Wow, Wolf. That was a pretty intense post. I gotta give you some props for that one. Because that's what you want, isn't it? A little attention and praise for what a smart gamer you are? There's only one problem:

You're wrong in almost every feasible way a human being could possibly be wrong.

I love screwing with you, you actually take the trolling to where it needs to be, "playful", and that is why conversing with you is fun.

First, I don't think the measuring stick for whether art drew somebody into a work is if they wrote about it in a magazine or talked about it at length.

The problem here is that you have no real basis for an argument here either. The "art style drew people in" and what wonderful record did you pull this from? While my argument has no real merit beyond my personal experience, the same can be said here of your argument as well. When I originally called this out I simply stated facts that would suggest such a statement is not very likely and it was you who jumped on this like it was nothing more than the truth of the matter when there is really no evidence to suggest one element over another. I simply stated evidence to show a counter to the OP's argument and I don't understand why you feel the need to validate it as an actual fact.

And your whole New Game+ argument, again, is a red herring. No one contested that CT has multiple endings. The issue is that CT can be completed, with all of the side content for that playthrough exhausted, in around 30-35 hours. About the same or less the time it takes just to complete the main story alone in PlayStation RPGs.

Yes but you missed how I said the game also has multiple elements to change the story and history, if you skip sidequests or choose certain decisions, the game becomes different and thus in order to experience all of CT's story and elements, it would take closer to the 60-80 hour mark, as you would need to play through the game multiple times not only for the endings but to see the alternate scenarios for certain decisions. The replay value actually pushes it to a later generations range, though technically I feel having an 60+ hour RPG today is more exhausting than fun as it's often just padding.

And Xenogears... ah, yes, sweet Xenogears. Is it overrated? Of course. And it's lacking elements can be demonstrably proven to the extent that only reaching arguments can be raised in its defense. It's not the "far and away" best game out of the PlayStation, Platinum Age of RPGs (I'm coining it). But it's still in that same circle of classics. I can't dispute that. The game missed a lot of basics for me, but it also nailed a lot of the more ambitious stuff so well

It just strikes me odd that for all of it's faults you would put it in the top ten. This simply just tells me something about how you think, my comment wasn't really a challenge.

I also don't think FFVII shares CT's rationale for hype, that people played it when they were 8. The PlayStation console at the time was marketed for the aging gaming population, teens and young adults, and went a long way towards bringing game consoles out of the closet with the action figures and board games and into the entertainment system, connected to the surround sound.

Dude, the vast majority of VII fans I've seen on forums, IRL and on surveys about the fandom suggests most VII fans had it as their first FF/RPG they played and were between 8-12 when it came out. While the Playstation may have been marketed towards my age group, it doesn't really change that many of the people who grew up on the Playstation was my age when I was busting my balls trying to get to Level 2 on Ghouls and Goblins on the NES. nce again, this is an argument that has no real solid facts one way or another but from what the census has shown me about VII fans on this forum, most of them were between 8-12 in 97, so until you come up with some hard style spreadsheets from multiple non-partisan affiliates to show that all the VII fans were "mature 16-21 years olds" I feel your argument is baseless.

Fallacy. Whether BoB likes FFXIII or not has no bearing on the capacity to look at FFVI in a reasonable way.

True, but I'm just teasing him cause that's what I do.

And I don't think my expectations have much to do with my capacity, neither. I read people on this board say DQV was the best in the series before I played it. I may agree with them. I can't say the same about FFVI.

Well first off, we're not exactly a heavy duty DQ fanbase, whereas as a VII fan for fifteen years, you've had to hear about this annoying game called FFIII/VI from older or more knowledgeable FF fans, who insist it's just as good or even better than a game you love. Unless you've been on a heavy DQ fan forum for ten years that I didn't know about, I would say the exposure to the hype is very different and not to mention the argumentative nature of this hype compared to a title you love is going to create a little bias on some level, no matter how much feel you may be unbias. The fact you have the audacity to even suggest it's the same thing as DQV's hype tells me you are either full of bulltrout or you are some kind of saint whom we should enshrine in a mausoleum and have holy men take great pilgrimages to worship under your teachings, cause you lack any bias or pettiness.

The whole fact that "this is an American list" is also off-topic. I'm not saying we should care what the Japanese think. I'm just accounting for how a community, who could not have played half of VI's predecessors, could come out and say "WOW I CAN'T BELIEVE THIS GAME CAME OUT OF NOWHERE AND DID SO MANY AMAZING THINGS!!!!1"

Yes but if this were a European list I could argue the list is the same issue with VII since it was pretty much the first real FF released in the PAL, regions, you can't really argue the love and "wonderment" of the game in PAL regions suffers from the same issues since they had not really played the first six games before it and even then didn't play them until years later after VII. I still don't feel that completely invalidates the opinions of these people despite my disagreement.

Anyway, the list is weird. I disagree with it. And I'm not sure why I care about it anymore...

You care cause you haven't had a good long drawn out, petty fanboy argument in a long time. Lists like this are bound to create this, I mean just skimming the responses is filled with troll bait, and your own "in defense of Polnareff" post was pretty much unnecessary for anything besides toll baiting.

[Loony BoB]

WK - You know damn well I always respond to trolling seriously. Why would people bother trolling me if they weren't going to get a response? On a sidenote, I can only assume from your lack of reaction to my post that you are conceding that I am right in everything I say.

[NeoCracker]

I think people have just taken the default position of you being wrong in all cases BoB.

[Loony BoB]

In that case, VI must be a horrible game, because I think it isn't.

[Bolivar]

I just wanna go over some highlights:

I love screwing with you, you actually take the trolling to where it needs to be, "playful", and that is why conversing with you is fun.

Me too. Here we go -

[O]nce (sic) again, this is an argument that has no real solid facts one way or another but from what the census has shown me about VII fans on this forum, most of them were between 8-12 in 97, so until you come up with some hard style spreadsheets from multiple non-partisan affiliates to show that all the VII fans were "mature 16-21 years olds" I feel your argument is baseless.

Fallacy. Whether BoB likes FFXIII or not has no bearing on the capacity to look at FFVI in a reasonable way.

True, but I'm just teasing him cause that's what I do.

The fact you have the audacity to even suggest it's the same thing as DQV's hype tells me you are either full of bulltrout or you are some kind of saint whom we should enshrine in a mausoleum and have holy men take great pilgrimages to worship under your teachings, cause you lack any bias or pettiness.

You know, say what you want about these drawn out, short novel length response posts, but at least some of it was able to give me a couple serious laughs.

...but not nearly as many laughs as the unfathomably nonsensical arguments you put forth!

I think the CT length argument has muddled, but the original assertion, that it is a short game, can be upheld. I may have muddled it talking about how long it takes to explore all the content, but the truth is, anyway you slice it, it is a short game because there is only so long one playthrough can be. And that length is shorter than later generation games, some of which do have alternate scenarios and multiple endings.

And about DQ, I'll admit, it probably didn't have the same impact as the VI/VII debate. Mostly because DQ fans are, by and large, not as infeasibly insane as you FFVI fan are... The things that actually come out of your mouths are terrifying... But at the time I was a huge fan of DQVIII, I thought it was one of the best RPGs I ever played yet here I was confronted with another group of people telling me an SNES game was better. But, again, there's the distinction, that these people were arguably right.

I also want to echo BoB's statement about FFVI's linearity. Yes, all the major events pretty much progress in a logical order. But even then, when it comes to the non-linear elements, saying FFVI is nonlinear is like saying Mega Man is nonlinear. You're basically just choosing what order you complete an array of sequences, with little to no impact on the story if you don't do them at all. Please don't berate me about the ending. Whether or not I see what happens to the 9th character or whether or not I skipped re-recruiting them is a trifle.

Anyway, I'll just end this with what I said about Xenogeras. I actually wouldn't put Xenogears in my top 10. But I also understand that more often than not, my peers probably would put it there. I'm ok with that, because the game was a really powerful emotional experience. But anyway you slice it, it's hard to objectively argue that it's not a much better game than Chrono Trigger or Final Fantasy VI.

[NeoCracker]

In that case, VI must be a horrible game, because I think it isn't.

No, it just means you probably like FF VI for all the wrong reasons or something. ;P

[Wolf Kanno]

I never said FFXIII is one of the best games, and I'm not sure if I've actually said it was 'great'. I do believe that the character grouping is arguably the best ever, the time spent showing us each character is the best ever, and that (most notably) it is a good game, not a crap one. You just seem to think that anyone who disagrees with you saying FFXIII is crap seems to have some insane obligation to state that it is a great game, one of the best, etc, when really they can just like the game without seeing it as one of the all time greats.

I'm sure you said it was a great game in some thread, but honeslty, it's not that I isagree with your position, it's honeslty that I find the idea of XIII being enjoyable as such a foreign concept that I honestly have to try to construct the type of individual who could possibly find enjoyment from this insufferable, poorly told, and tedious game simply results in a migraine. I honestly can't see anything good enough in this title to feel it deserves evn being called an "okay game". It is seriously the worst thing I've played since I was a child playing some of the shoevelware titles on the NES. I will be honest when I say I don't really trust any other games such a person would recommend cause we are seriously from two different worlds if that trite is anything more that utter trout. It is 40 hours of my life I will never get back and I seriously want a refund.

Otherwise one could argue that VI's (and pretty much every other FF's) story is just as linear. All the key points happen in order, as they do with pretty much any JRPG ever made.

I also want to echo BoB's statement about FFVI's linearity. Yes, all the major events pretty much progress in a logical order. But even then, when it comes to the non-linear elements, saying FFVI is nonlinear is like saying Mega Man is nonlinear. You're basically just choosing what order you complete an array of sequences, with little to no impact on the story if you don't do them at all. Please don't berate me about the ending. Whether or not I see what happens to the 9th character or whether or not I skipped re-recruiting them is a trifle.

Well not really with VI as the player's choices can affect minor things in the game (such as the fate of one party member or whether a certain character joins you) as well as the fact that the WoR is technically non-linear as the player can choose to actually finish some or all of the characters stories, or go straight to the end, unlike most of the FF series where the final dungeon doesn't open up until all of the main story has been told. As soon as you get the airship, you could just head straight to Kefka's Tower and choose to end the game whereas the players power to control the flow of other FF games is pretty much a choice of playing or not playing. The game is filled with hidden scenes and certain consequences for choices and you will never discover them without either a guide or seriously exploring the game and trying new things, which is somethign you can't really say about a game like FFXIII or even Xenogears for that matter.

It's not Elder Scrolls non-linear but for a JRPG, especially a story driven one like VI, it's pretty unique for the genre and something I feel is important and should return. JRPGs thrive on the illusion of choice and I feel VI/CT found a pretty decent sweet spot of doing that without making the story suffer for it.

As for my preferred style, the fact that VII, VIII, V and XII are there alongside XIII as my preferred Final Fantasy games pretty much says that linearity is not my preference.

I wouldn't really count most of those titles as being non-linear. They are certainly not as linear as XIII but there are few RPGs that are linear as XIII (thank god) which is more like a high budget visual novel with a middle management A.I. battle system tacked on.

I've almost finished FFVI now! Got the six dragons (two left are in Kefka's Tower) and all espers and every character has every spell available at the moment (exception: Just got Raiden/Quick now, so am still working on a few characters for that, but not heavily bothered). So basically, Kefka's Tower and then I'm golden for FFIX. The gameplay in VI is great, I just find the story scenes to be average. That opera scene is nothing short of boring for me. General Leo remains my preferred character in the game, and... yeah.

Glad you had fun which is the most important thing in all of this, disagree about your thoughts on the story or opera scene but that's a discussion for another day. You have no excuse for not posting in the VI forums anymore, so get to work.

EDIT: Wow, FFVI's final dungeon was shockingly easy. xD I guess putting all spells on all characters = overpowering?

Yeah...

I think the CT length argument has muddled, but the original assertion, that it is a short game, can be upheld. I may have muddled it talking about how long it takes to explore all the content, but the truth is, anyway you slice it, it is a short game because there is only so long one playthrough can be. And that length is shorter than later generation games, some of which do have alternate scenarios and multiple endings.

The real question here is does it even matter? In hindsight, our discussion almost sounds like we're putting some value on the length of a game when I'm sure you and I could agree it's a meaningless assertion unless you're a budget gamer and even then we could at least agree CT offers enough content to satisfy someone who may only be able to have one game for awhile. This is probably the dumbest argument we've ever had.

And about DQ, I'll admit, it probably didn't have the same impact as the VI/VII debate. Mostly because DQ fans are, by and large, not as infeasibly insane as you FFVI fan are... The things that actually come out of your mouths are terrifying... But at the time I was a huge fan of DQVIII, I thought it was one of the best RPGs I ever played yet here I was confronted with another group of people telling me an SNES game was better. But, again, there's the distinction, that these people were arguably right.

Says the man who is part of the fanbase that lapped up every single drip of the god awful Compilation of VII just so they could get a hard on watching Sephy and Cloud fight like they were in the Matrix, or the group that argues over Aerith vs Aeris spelling, or even arguing whether Cloud should date the chick the story blatantly tells you he winds up with, or a dead chick. That's a high class fanbase for you. :semicolonpee:

On the more "serious" matters, my point is that the context is completely different in your situation. On paper it sounds like a similar scenario but everything from length of exposure to the hype as well as how meaningful the game was to you changes everything. You may have loved DQVIII, but I doubt it did for you what FFVII did so it's really not the same scenario. I honestly wasn't surprised that I liked DQV more than DQVIII but I didn't exactly 'love" DQVIII either as I felt it's main strengths were simply the series finally producing a game with modern RPG standards in terms of graphics, character building, and story. Even then I felt other games did it better. DQV is a great game and I would probably concede it's the best in the series despite my personal bias for DQIII and that I feel DQIII is a much more important game for both the series and the genre unlike DQV, but I was a little sad the game didn't completely live up to the hype, especially since I tend to have a bias for the 16-bit classics.