Talk:Final Fantasy

Contents

1 Yoshitaka Amano and Final Fantasy IX 2 Other comments 3 Lion's comment- 1 Standardization 2 Article too long 3 Final Fantasy XI release date for PS2 and PC 4 Featured Article 5 Game boy final fantasy's 6 question about common themes for music 7 Final Fantasy Wiki 8 Note: discussion on related page 9 More on common themes 10 PSP 11 Spells 12 Reorganization and reversion? 13 New images 14 The Spirits Within - concepts and creatures

Yoshitaka Amano and Final Fantasy IX

I'm worried I may be getting into an edit war with someone over the status of Yoshitaka Amano and Final Fantasy IX. I know all the early publicity material said that he was going to be character designer for the game, but the credits to the game itself do not bear this out (Shukou Murase, Toshiyuki Itahana and Shin Nagasawa are listed as designers). Amano did have a role in the game, but it was "image illustration," not character design. There's more info on this here (http://thewayin.etherealvoid.net/games/gamersthink/index.shtml).

--In response to the above--

• I was the one to credit Amano with FF IX when I did not see it mentioned the first time. I saw his illustrations in EGM's article and just assumed he was responsible for character designs. Thanks for the corrections.

Other comments

I think that the final fantasy seris is a freat seris i have read some playstation magizines but some of them think that it is a bad game seris but I think it was a good start and will end up to go on for a long time also that I think it was cool what squaresoft did they were the only ones to make a game into a movie instead of a movie into a game all games to day but resident evil were either comic book heros or were movies before they were games but final fantasy didn't do that (Wow! what a long sentence with no punctuation at all!) [sprechen sie englisch?]

I can think of many examples of games not using comic books or movies as there base. Metal Gear sereis for example. Also, Resident Evil (which is another example of a game not from someting else) also made movies (2) based on a game.

Lion's comment-

I think that a critical treatment of the universals to Final Fantasy are important. In particular:

• A treatment of the graphics techniques utilized by Final Fantasy 1-6 (check)
• A discussion of the principle magic systems and elemental theory, including appropriate links to theories in the world. (Water, Fire, Earth, Air, Spirit)
• A discussion of the common themes of Final Fantasy: Humanism, Ecologicy, Class Warfare, Spiritualism, and links to the European Enlightenment and & Romantic Era movements (http://www.ibiblio.org/wm/paint/glo/romanticism/), both philisophically and artistically
• Western and Eastern influence and synthesis.
• A discussion of the mystical/religious/spiritual assumptions implicit in game scenarios.

I would also be interested in seeing a wiki treatment of the themes connecting the different Final Fantasy Universes. --DropDeadGorgias

Fulfilled Lion's request on graphical history; i went on to explain the next-gen games as well. i'll do some of ther others another time. I 'checked' the requests filled. Lockeownzj00 22:29, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I would like to see seperate articles on FF concepts, similar to the sub-articles in Ultima, such as Magic in Final Fantasy, Monsters in Final Fantasy, Mythology in Final Fantasy, Character Design of Final Fantasy, Music of Final Fantasy, etc.

---

The topic's for each version of the series are obsolete. Since each one was only one paragraph in size with no hope of ever becoming significantly larger, I put the text of these articles into the "Final Fantacy" topic directly. All those other articles can be redirected to the main one or (in my opinion) deleted. Rlee0001 06:04 Aug 1, 2002 (PDT)

--- Pity, because I was looking to expand on each one instead of just a paragraph, (ie discuss themes in each game and whatnot).... Xknight 18:40, 14 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Some of the individual games now have articles for themselves, such as FF1, FF6, FF7, and a few others. Some of these are long enough to merit their existance, and should remain as seperate articles. I think we should work towards making such detailed articles on the individual games, and thus we will have not only more substantial information on them, but we will also be able to focus the main FF article on the series as a whole (the main article seems a bit cluttered with all the other games talked about in it). -- LGagnon

I agree. I think we should make an article for each seperate game. Although routines are very...well, routine in Wikipedia, several things are not uniform and must be made as such. Each game should have a detailed article; some do not even have links, they simply redirect to this page. If one article has a table with all the game info, so should all the rest. The new Final Fantasy 7 Spin-off starring The Turks should be added somewhere as well. Lockeownzj00 21:24, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Do we still need the "How to Play" section? Except for the (brief) comparison with Dragon Quest, it seems like the remainder of the information is repeated several other places in the article.

Standardization

Alright, people. I've decided to break down and do it because no one else will. I am going to reform and modify every single Final Fantasy article so that there is one standard. Each will have the same basic categories of discussion, along with pictures, discussions, etc. I will fix and make all redirects to make the main pages be the roman numeral of the game. This will take a while, but it has to be done. I'm hopeful of the final result.

What I need from you guys is some Story help. I will gladly absolutely write up the entire storyline a la the [[Final Fantasy IV] article, which includes spoilers (promo-plot paragraphs don't cut it). But for controversial storyline games like Final Fantasy VII or VIII, I know I'll need some experts to help me out. Thanks guys!

Lockeownzj00 23:00, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Article too long

I believe that part of the specific information about the games should be moved their main articles so this could be shortened a bit. Can somebody do it? --xDCDx 09:09, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Final Fantasy XI release date for PS2 and PC

It was released first for the PS2, see this links: [1] (http://www.gamefaqs.com/console/ps2/data/27610.html) [2] (http://www.gamefaqs.com/computer/doswin/data/16968.html). --xDCDx 23:30, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

In the United States, it was released on the PC first. --I run like a Welshman 22:10, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Featured Article

What are the odds of getting this made into a featured artical?ZeWrestler 23:51 March 14, 2005 (UTC)

As good as any other Wikipedia article, in the abstract scheme of things. But it needs to be tightened up considerably first. Some of the sections, too, could stand to spun off into related articles. – Seancdaug 23:58, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)

Well, should we go for getting tighting this artical up then. ZeWrestler 02:13 March 14, 2005 (UTC)

Just a remark, some people were turning down Mega Man as a featured article because of the fan links it had there. It's gotten to the point where people utterly refuse to have any links other than these dull directories... maybe this could either A) show them it's a moot point or B) do the same thing and remove ALL links in favor of official ones and Google directories? --Shadow Hog 04:49, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

My thoughts exactly. It is simple to say Wikipedia is not a web directory. The number here can easily be said to be excessive. --Henrygb 02:03, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Game boy final fantasy's

I mentioned this to Seancdaug a couple of days ago, and he recommended that i post about it here. Theres a few final fantasy games that exist for the game boy that havn't been touched on here yet. I was thinking we add them to the Template:FinalFantasy series i created a while back, but i want to get some opinions here about it first before something is done. What do you guys think? -- ZeWrestler 4:16 March 20, 2005 (UTC)

Well, I know Final Fantasy Adventure's just Seiken Densetsu... The other three are up in the air as far as I'm concerned, though. --Shadow Hog 06:21, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

These other games (Final Fantasy Legend) are actually part of the SaGa series, not Final Fantasy games.

Yeah, but given that the majority of Wikipedia's audience are going to be familiar with them as "Final Fantasy Legend," it seems like there's a strong case for putting them in the template. The question, as I see it, is whether or not we should do more than just redirect to the SaGa series page, as is currently done. Although, to be fair, the SaGa page needs a bit more fleshing out, and since we don't seem to have individual entries for the three GB SaGa/Final Fantasy Legend games, it's not clear what else we can do at this stage. – Seancdaug 19:08, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC)

question about common themes for music

i am just curious about the common themes for music being edited out. i just thought that its also sort of a tradition that FF did follow and pointed out some examples. did i get some facts wrong?

The facts were fine. The problem is that the article is already on something of the lengthy side, and certain elements (such as individual character themes) are not really so unique to the series as to be worthy of note. Music already has its own section under "overview," so I was trying to rein in the section, basically. – Seancdaug 19:01, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)

Just another thought: there's really enough information about FF music to warrant another article devoted to it. Something like "Music in the Final Fantasy games" or such. It might be worth looking into something like that, rather than trying to make it all fit into the main article.... – Seancdaug 19:12, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)

Cool... i guess that makes sense. here's my take... XD..... on the topic of common themes, i feel that its actually worth pointing out THE common themes and IMHO, music/art is some great part. especially its there all the time.

As for a section on its own. personally, i wouldn't go that far. or if so, it actually WON'T be something worth mentioning since most people wanting to know about FF music would be composers, music style, sheet music, bands played and perhaps the names of the songs.

Anyways, .... ok great thx for clearing that up!! Mint greentea 08:03, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Final Fantasy Wiki

Final Fantasy Wiki is still in its early stages of development. It does not obviate the need for external links from the main article. The Browse Final Fantasy Wiki page only has category links. Tedius Zanarukando 10 Apr 2005 0:24 (EST).

That's as may be, but the problem is that the links section for this article very quickly gets out of hand. Again, Wikipedia is not a web directory, and most of the additions to the external links section smack of self-promotion. As a more specialized project, Final Fantasy Wiki (http://finalfantasy.wikicities.com/wiki/Main_Page) is more suited to that sort of detail. Rather than cluttering up this article (which is already over the "ideal" page size limit), it would be more logical to edit FF Wiki so that it can be of greater use. – Seancdaug 22:48, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)

woooo... can i join that wiki place and become a member or something? i got like the FF artbook and music albums info to share :D (eventhough you can get that off the net but.... yayayaayyy!!) Mint greentea 06:02, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Note: discussion on related page

Just wanted to drop in and alert everyone to a discussion Tedius Zanarukando are having over on the Talk:List of people involved in working on the Final Fantasy series page. It applies to the content of this page (as its my contention that it should be folded back here in some form or another), so if anyone wants to chime in with their two cents, it might be easier to build some sort of consensus. *shrugs* – Seancdaug 20:40, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)

More on common themes

I removed the section on "Rebellion," since it strikes me that this is less of an overall theme of the FF series than of CRPGs in general. It's a convention of the genre, not of the series itself, and it seems like addressing it here is inappropriate and redundant. We could go on almost indefinitely by enumerating a various coincidential similarities between games, but that the idea of "themes" implies something a little more intentional and less circumstantial than that. In short, something a little more solid and specific than "rebellion." It really seems like the tendency, in general, is to let the themes section inflate a little uncontrollably, and I really can't see this as being good for the article, which is already a little too sprawling and haphazard. Anyone else have any thoughts? – Seancdaug 02:31, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)

I agree to a certain point, but Rebellion is intentionally and clearly a running theme in Final Fantasy. I would be like saying that space-battles are not a common theme in the Star Trek movies.

But that's really a genre convention. Honestly: the vast majority of CRPGs would seem to incorporate this as a theme more often than not. As such, I don't agree that it's "intentionally" (or even "clearly") a FF theme: it's not unique to Final Fantasy, and mentioning it specifically here is pointless and redundant. It should be mentioned in the CRPG article, and it can be taken as read that the Final Fantasy series inherits that trait from the genre of which it is a part. – Seancdaug 14:00, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)

It may be a common theme in CRPGs but that doesn't stop it from being one of FF's calling cards. I can think of many, many CRPGs that don't have rebellion as a theme; but almost every FF uses it.

Most of console RPGs I can think of off the top of my head do use it. More do than do not, in any case. I'm not arguing that it's not relatively common in the FF series, I'm just arguing that it's not relevant. There are plenty of other things that "almost every FF" uses that don't deserve mention in the common themes section because they're more appropriately recognize as conventions of the genre. We wouldn't list things like "magic" (as a broad concept, not FF-specific spells) or "random battles" there for just that reason. If it's not a unique trait of the franchise, it should be covered in a broader category, so that a) this page doesn't grow beyond all control, and b) we avoid duplication of effort. It's pretty amorphous for a "theme," anyway (like "conflict"), anyway. – Seancdaug 13:02, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)

PSP

Can someone post a source for the claim that Square-Enix plans to publish a Final Fantasy on the PSP? (Refered to in the opening paragraph.) Thanks. :) --JiFish 19:47, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

Crisis Core: Final Fantasy VII. They've also announced plans to release Final Fantasy VII: Advent Children as a UMD movie disc for the PSP. None of this is new: IIRC, the PSP plans were announced well before the announcement of development for the Nintendo DS, and things continue to proceed apace. – Seancdaug 19:52, May 24, 2005 (UTC)

Crisis Core, of course. Thank you. --JiFish 19:54, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

Spells

I was thinking of creating a category for Category:Final Fantasy magic, and have articles on commonly occuring and distinctive FF spells such as Wall, Flare, Meteo, White, Doom, Break, etc. Do you think that's too crufty? If I create them, what should the naming convention for the articles be? Flare (magic)? Flare (Final Fantasy)? --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 16:37, May 27, 2005 (UTC)

Honestly, I think it's probably a tad too crufty. I've gone ahead and posted the Final Fantasy magic article I've been tinkering with for a week or so now. I think, in general, one single article dealing with Final Fantasy magic is more appropriate, and that's what I tried to do with the linked article. I just can't see many spells being notable enough to deserve their own articles, really. – Seancdaug 07:49, May 30, 2005 (UTC)

Is it worth mentioning that "summon" type magic shows up in a good deal of games at least from FFIV on, as well as "learned" magical skills from enemies such as Gau's rages and blue magic?BigCow

Where do you mean? A couple of us have been poking away at the aforementioned Final Fantasy magic article, and I've been merging the information scattered around into that, where appropriate (I just merged the old Blue magic article into it). But I think it's kind of tricky to handle: there's a page on summon magic that, in its current form, is probably too long to squeeze into the other article, so it's just included as a "see also" link. The major problem is that an article such as that can very easily get out of control, so I think it's important to establish a notability threshold and not include things that only show up once or twice in the entire series. For example, since Gau's Rages are unique to one character in one game, they would likely be better handled in the Gau article. With regards to this article, maybe a sentence of two relating to overall magic and gameplay mechanics couldn't hurt, but there's not too much point in duplication what exists elsewhere, I would think. – Seancdaug 06:19, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)

Reorganization and reversion?

I noticed that User:205.188.117.12 had reverted most of reorganization I carried out a day or two ago, but left no explanation why. The reason for my edits, just to expand upon my edit note, were fairly simple: the distinction between subsections under the "Overview" header and distinct sections of their own was pretty much arbitrary. "Music," for instance, was a subsection of "Overview," but "Graphics" was not, which didn't strike me as making a great deal of sense. Also, "game screens" would seem to relate more directly to gameplay (since it is, after all, the primary mode of interaction with the game itself) than it does to "graphics." The other major change I made had to do with the links section: it would seem to make more sense to link to the Final Fantasy music article from the section about "Music" than to just throw it in at the end of the page. People looking for information regarding music in the FF series are more likely to look there than at a somewhat daunting list of links covering, well, pretty much everything under the sun. Also, the "related games" section was almost entirely redundant: there are links to the vast majority of those games elsewhere in the article, and the categorization system should handle the rest (that is why it's there, after all). Anyway, just my thoughts. Any comments? – Seancdaug 22:56, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

I prefer your version. I was going to revert User:205.188.117.12's changes, but didn't in the end. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 13:57, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

New images

DarkEvil uploaded several new images to the page: namely Image:Nobuo Uematsu & The Black Mages after a live concert.jpg and Image:Final Fantasy IV JAP Airship.png, and I can't really tell why. While they're not quite identical to the images we had up previously (Image:Tbm12.png and Image:Ffivj 1.PNG, respectively), they're very, very close. Furthermore, the quality of both new images is a bit suspect, IMO: the FF4 image is extremely blurry, and looks like it may have been resized and resampled. As a result, it compresses very poorly in PNG, and is approximately 100x larger than the original image. The Black Mages image isn't a problem in terms of file size, but it has the same poor quality blurring, and again, looks resized/resampled. Also, the thumbnail sizes were all upped to 350px, which seems a bit large for lower resolution displays. I've changed them back, and am going to put the two aforementioned images up for deletion votes unless anyone has any objections. Gotta say, though, that the FFXII logo does look better at the top of the page than the old FF1 US boxart, IMO.... – Seancdaug 02:02, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)

The Spirits Within - concepts and creatures

 * Feature-length, theatrically released computer-generated film featuring
 concepts and creatures from the Final Fantasy games.

I'm not sure this true. Looking at the Common themes section and I can't see any themes that the movie shares with the games. What are peoples thoughts on this? --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 18:38, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)

Well, it's got Cid... sort of. Other than that... not too much, admittedly. – Seancdaug 18:43, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)

I'm thinking this line might need to be revised. I'm almost 100% positive that no famous ff creatures feature. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 22:20, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)

Agreed. If it does (and it's been years since I've last watched it), it's certainly no more than a cameo role, and may not even be worthy of note. Do you want to take a crack at revising it, then? – Seancdaug 22:52, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)

I've changed it to "Feature-length, theatrically released computer-generated film released under the Final Fantasy brand." But it doesn't read quite right, IMO. I welcome futher revision. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 23:11, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)