Final Fantasy 7 sucks, or is it just me?
Gunawan Agus
I am kind of amazed that noone ever said any bad things about this game
in this newsgroup considering FF7 has many pitfalls of its own. First
of all, I enjoyed RPG of all kinds. The last good RPG I played on PC is
Fallout, and the last one on console is FF3 (or is it FF4?) on SNES. I
bought the game the day it was released with high expectation and good
will :) towards it.
Now, the things I found sux about the game:
- The storyline is way way way too dramatic and it's cliche-ridden. How
many more 'outcast turned hero' or 'friend turned to foe, foe turned to
friend' can we endure?
- Shallow characters. Like power rangers and ninja turtles, these
characters are best defined by their costumes, styles of fighting, and
weapons of choice. Even the fighting styles are not that different, a
far cry from previous FF installments. There's also the infamous (and
irritating) ebonics that the one big black dude is using.
- Cumbersome item/weapon management, specifically the materias.
Materias are magical rocks that can be 'installed' to your weapons which
will grant you magic spells that was stored within it. These materias
have experience points and will grow in abilities when they gain
levels. The thing is, you can only have 3 characters (out of 8)
playable at any one time, which means that you have to rotate/juggle the
30+ or 40+ materias that you might have. Every weapon has a different
type of materia holder and you have to spend quite some time arranging
these materias when you upgrade your weapons. Major drag.
- Graphics is good at first, then it becomes annoying. Sure, the
graphics looks impressive for the first 10 hours or so.. then it really
gets to you. Most of the time, you will spend your exploration on a
beautifully drawn 2D map with your 3D character moving on it. There
must be hundreds of these 2D backgrounds and some of them are drawn from
a questionable perspective that at the end just serves to confuse you
when you have to navigate your characters on it. During combat, your
characters and the enemy are 3D, plus your spell and weapons. Some of
the more powerful materias can summon gods to strike on the baddies.
The animation for these summoning are unbelieaveably good! BUT they last
for 40 seconds or so, and there's no way to skip them when you've seen
them 100 times already. This makes a very slow gameplay.
- Character skill advancement is too artificial. Every character has a
new 'break limit', or special techniques that can be learnt through
practicing the previously acquired skills. Now, this is fine if the
combat is interesting and requires your attention, but most of the time,
you can just press one button (X in PSX) and switch your TV to cable to
catch Jay Leno's monologue, back in 5 minutes, and you won't miss a
thing.
- Basically the exact it's from the exact same mold as the previous
console RPG. When FF3 (or FF4) was out, it was exciting. For the first
time, you can control more than one party. For the first time, you have
characters with special moves that're truly special (street fighter
control, tools, gambling, copycat, etc.) That game is a marked
improvement from the previous FF installments. FF7, on the other hand,
is same old same old. See is this is familiar to you: walking on the
desert, can't cross shallow water, get the hovercraft, can't cross
mountain, get a plane, can't cross higher mountain, upgrade the plane,
can't go up to the moon, etc...
Of course, this is FF7 for PSX. The PC version might be different, but
I doubt it will be much different. I know many people enjoy this game
and I don't mean to annoy them by this, but there are people out there
who haven't played the game and might be wondering...
wan
Fred Quattrone
The reason no one complains about it here is because this is a forum for PC
games not PSX games. When it is finally released for PC, you will see the
complaints. I personally do not think that this game will make it on the PC
platform. There are too many things in this game that CPRG players do not
like. The save game feature is terrible and there are many action and timed
sequences. While FF7 has many fine points (Comabat is fun) it has many sore
points. My main problem is that the game is too linear. Almost everything
has to be done in sequence. I guess we will se what happens when it is
released.
--
Fred Quattrone
<<<Rollo The Talking Dragon UDIC>>>
______________________________________
Reviewer, The Games Domain, Travellers Inn
PC Game Reviews, Demos, Walkthroughs, Cheats
Http://WWW.Gamesdomain.com/Gdreview
______________________________________
Visit the Koffin, The Online Metal/Extreme Music 'Zine
Reviewer, Music, The Koffin
http://members.aol.com/thekoffin/home/koffin.htm
'Adhere to the voice of the cosmic mortuary. Mankind is doomed - rejoice in
the armageddon.
Metal is the only master now! Doom or be doomed.'
-Lee Dorian-
akaroth
Gunawan Agus wrote:
>
> I am kind of amazed that noone ever said any bad things about this game
> in this newsgroup considering FF7 has many pitfalls of its own. First
> of all, I enjoyed RPG of all kinds. The last good RPG I played on PC
> bought the game the day it was released with high expectation and good
> will :) towards it.
>
> Now, the things I found sux about the game:
>
> - The storyline is way way way too dramatic and it's cliche-ridden. How
> many more 'outcast turned hero' or 'friend turned to foe, foe turned to
> friend' can we endure?
These ideas are hardly cliches, especially considering how they were used
in FF7. There are things I do not like about FF7, but a cliche-ridden
storyline is not one of them.
> - Shallow characters. Like power rangers and ninja turtles, these
> characters are best defined by their costumes, styles of fighting, and
> weapons of choice. Even the fighting styles are not that different, a
> far cry from previous FF installments. There's also the infamous (and
> irritating) ebonics that the one big black dude is using.
Have you played the game? The characters in FF7 were easily deeper than
any FF before it; wether they were better characters or not is one's own
opinion. Complaining that the fighting styles are not unique enough is
not exactly valid, either; each uses a different weapon and a different
set of limit breaks.
> - Cumbersome item/weapon management, specifically the materias.
> Materias are magical rocks that can be 'installed' to your weapons
> will grant you magic spells that was stored within it. These materias
> have experience points and will grow in abilities when they gain
> levels. The thing is, you can only have 3 characters (out of 8)
> playable at any one time, which means that you have to rotate/juggle
> 30+ or 40+ materias that you might have. Every weapon has a different
> type of materia holder and you have to spend quite some time arranging
> these materias when you upgrade your weapons. Major drag.
If you don't like resource management, you probably won't like this part.
However, saying the majority of PC gamers don't like resource management
is like saying starcraft won't sell.. so I'm guess no one will take much
exception to the materia system. (Personally, I liked FF3US's system
better, because, well, I found it more complex and engaging, with more
payoff for your efforts).
> - Graphics is good at first, then it becomes annoying. Sure, the
> graphics looks impressive for the first 10 hours or so.. then it really
> gets to you. Most of the time, you will spend your exploration on a
> beautifully drawn 2D map with your 3D character moving on it. There
> must be hundreds of these 2D backgrounds and some of them are drawn
> a questionable perspective that at the end just serves to confuse you
> when you have to navigate your characters on it. During combat, your
> characters and the enemy are 3D, plus your spell and weapons. Some of
> the more powerful materias can summon gods to strike on the baddies.
> The animation for these summoning are unbelieaveably good! BUT they
> for 40 seconds or so, and there's no way to skip them when you've seen
> them 100 times already. This makes a very slow gameplay.
This is probably a matter of personal preference. Try not playing the
game for a while, then come back to it. The graphics will blow you away
again. I never minded seeing the summons, no matter how many times I saw
them previously (except for Super Nova, maybe :)
> - Character skill advancement is too artificial. Every character has a
> new 'break limit', or special techniques that can be learnt through
> practicing the previously acquired skills. Now, this is fine if the
> combat is interesting and requires your attention, but most of the
> you can just press one button (X in PSX) and switch your TV to cable to
> catch Jay Leno's monologue, back in 5 minutes, and you won't miss a
> thing.
I personally found the combat weak in FF7, but I know people who swear by
it as the best in any RPG. And if the combat is boring you, go fight the
weapons.
> - Basically the exact it's from the exact same mold as the previous
> console RPG. When FF3 (or FF4) was out, it was exciting. For the
> time, you can control more than one party. For the first time, you
> characters with special moves that're truly special (street fighter
> control, tools, gambling, copycat, etc.) That game is a marked
> improvement from the previous FF installments. FF7, on the other hand,
> is same old same old. See is this is familiar to you: walking on the
> desert, can't cross shallow water, get the hovercraft, can't cross
> mountain, get a plane, can't cross higher mountain, upgrade the plane,
> can't go up to the moon, etc...
Agreed. However, a lot of the people who are going to play FF7 have
never played an FF game before. This includes all the people who bought
a PSX just to play this game as well as those who will play it on PC when
it comes out.
--
akaroth
"Here's to trying.. rhymes with dying."
- Sir Markham, Test of the Twins
"Why do people cling to life when they know they can't live forever?"
- Kefka, Final Fantasy VI
Septerra Core is the first Final Fantasy-style RPG for the PC.
Visit Akaroth's Septerra Core page at
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/dimension/4212/
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |||__|||
TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTY POSTS \/ \/
TO ALT.GAMES.FINAL-FANTASY (250?)
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% \__/
MCBad4Life
I agree in some terms, Final Fantasy 7 was a major disapointment to me. It
promised too much and din't deliver enough. Fallout on the other hand is great
I'm currently at the Necropolis looking for the water-pump junk. Where is it?
I'm near the really big Ghouls that look like "The Incredible" Hulk. Please
help me out here.
Bad For Life,
MC
Aaron D. Thompson
Comparing FF7 to Fallout is a joke. IMO, Fallout isn't that good at all.
People are just hyping it because it's the first halfway decent RPG for the
PC in quite some time. In terms of depth of story, and overall fun factor,
FF7 is the best.
Gunawan Agus
Umm... I am not comparing the two. I was just explaining where I came
from by mentioning some games that I enjoyed.
Fallout is a great game, not the greatest, especially if you have played
(and probably spent numerous hours) Wasteland, then you might find some
repetitions in there. The greatest thing about Fallout is its
flexibility and I enjoyed it a lot more than the force-fed storyline of
FF7 which is not that good to begin with. Of course, this is all
subjective, but if you look at FF7's storyline and think about the
standard that we uphold for movies, then you can see that it's actually
weak. Unfortunately, the folks at squaresoft would like to think of
their game of having a 'movie'-like story (they are making an FF movie
right now) and judged by their own standard, FF7 is a disappointment.
They really need to be more creative.
I wasn't going to compare Fallout and FF7 and probably I did that for a
little while up there, but the point is this: I agree that Fallout and
FF7 cannot be compared side by side, one reason is that they are on
different platforms, for gad's sake. However, if you want to compare
the game based on Fun Factor, then here's my take:
on the scale of 1 to 10,
Fallout scores at 9 for 30+ hours then it ends.
FF7 scores at 9 for the first 10 hours, then 8, then 7... and it just
got old real fast.
I know that people can spend 100+ hours playing FF7 hunting for the
secret items (you will need to manufacture your own motivation for why
you would want to spend that much time randomly scouring the world for
these ultra secret thingies) and in that case, they'll be getting their
money worth.
Another point, since this is a computer-rpg games newsgroup and FF7 is
supposed to come to PC next year, people might want to know how this
game fares against the like of Fallout. Again, no fair comparison can
be made between the two, and folks, if you've never played console RPG
or FF series before, this game might be fun! Just throw all your
expectations out of the window and start fresh.
wan
Day-glow Orange Dragon
"Aaron D. Thompson" <got...@jurai.org> wrote:
>Comparing FF7 to Fallout is a joke. IMO, Fallout isn't that good at all.
>People are just hyping it because it's the first halfway decent RPG for the
>PC in quite some time. In terms of depth of story, and overall fun factor,
>FF7 is the best.
>
>
"The play's the thing." The story in FF7 is truly engrossing and I do
not regret purchasing a Playstation just so that I could play this
game. Fallout, however, is at least as good, but on a different
level.
Rob
Day-glow Orange Dragon
Dwayne Carnachan
i agree - i too don't regret my purchase of a playstation for FF7 (and
i also did enjoy fallout) - however i have been playing FF7 for much
longer than i played fallout and i still haven't got sick of it - i
agree the storyline often makes me laugh at the cliches (and the one
the char's seem to shake when angry with their block hands) - but
overall i've found the storyline quite engrossing...
====================================================================
Dwayne Carnachan
Social Sciences Computer Support
The University Of Waikato
"Nothing is as frustrating as arguing with someone who knows what he's talking about."
Colin Day
MCBad4Life
>Comparing FF7 to Fallout is a joke. IMO, Fallout isn't that good at all.
>People are just hyping it because it's the first halfway decent RPG for the
>PC in quite some time. In terms of depth of story, and overall fun factor,
>FF7 is the best.
>
>
>
Sorry pal, I bought Final Fantasy when it was first released and in comparison
to Fallout, Fallout comes out on top. It might be the _BEST_ RPG in a long time
for PC, but it's aloso better than FF7. It gets away from the _fantasy_ crap
and delivers many new features which will probally be in future FF games. It
also proves that fancy looking graphics aren't what makes a game good. In case
of Final Fantasy 7, well they made that game through graphics, and the only
reason that it's looked at soo highly is because it brought thousands of U.S.
gamers to RPGs which wasn't such a high number before FF7.
Bad For Life,
MC
Scott Lewis
>Comparing FF7 to Fallout is a joke. IMO, Fallout isn't that good at all.
>People are just hyping it because it's the first halfway decent RPG for the
>PC in quite some time. In terms of depth of story, and overall fun factor,
>FF7 is the best.
What Final Fantasy is lacking is a thing called good ole American ROLE
playing. The best American games have multiple paths, multiple ways of
doing things, and actually let the player change the world and possibly
alter the path of the game away from the main story line. (Such as the
billions of mini-quests in Wasteland, signing on with Blackthorne in Ultima
V.) Heck, even Diablo had multiple different characters you could play to
change the game.
To me, I just see Final Fantasy VII as an adventure game that adds combat to
make the game longer. It's interactions with the environment are as
preconceived as most adventure games, while in real RPG's there are very few
"magical" items that are necessary to complete the game while everything
else is just stuff.
Also, I enjoyed Final Fantasy III much more than Final Fantasy VII. I
thought everything on the whole was better except FMV sequences.
The role that RPG's may play in Japan may be the same role that adventure
games play from Americans.
-Scott-
John Vu
The water pump room is next to the room with the "big Ghouls". To get
to it you have to first talk to the Super Mutant and trick him into
thinking that you are a ghoul. Or else you can fight him(generally not
a good idea).
Belial XX
>Sorry pal, I bought Final Fantasy when it was first released and in
>comparison to Fallout, Fallout comes out on top. It might be the >_BEST_ RPG
in a long time for PC, but it's aloso better than FF7. >It gets away from the
_fantasy_ crap
Maybe you should actually PLAY the game before you make an opinion of it.The
game is sci-fi futursitc and has a very cyber-punkish feel to it.The name is
very decieving.
>and delivers many new features which will probally be in future >FF games.
FF games are always very innovative.For example,you breed,raise,breed and race
these animals called Chocobos.You equip these materia which give you ablities
to summon different elementals,gain skills,increase stats,etc.The game is chock
full of mini-games like a real-time strategy game,a motorcycle chase,submarine
battle,etc.These are just a few examples of many of the innovatie things
found.,I doubt Square(the makers of the game) will borrow features from
Fallout.I doubt they have even heard of Fallout since they live in Japan.
>It also proves that fancy looking graphics aren't what makes a >game good. In
case of Final Fantasy 7, well they made that game >through graphics,
No,actually it was made through plot.That is what the FF series is famous
for,plots and FF 7 is no exception.In fact I think it has the best plot in the
series and one of the most original and well-developed plots ever.Gameplay is
also top-notch.Yes,the graphics are breath-taking but Square NEVER will rely
on graphics for their games.They have a HUGE reputation to live to in Japan and
they try(and succeed)to make the best possible game they can make and since
they are one of the most talented developers in the world,that is saying a hell
of alot.
Belial XX
>Also, I enjoyed Final Fantasy III much more than Final Fantasy >VII. I
thought everything on the whole was better except FMV >sequences.
In FF 3 you had little in the way of choosing how your characters are made
up.For example they all had their own skills that only they had and no one else
could use.In FF 7, you CHOOSE who is the main magic-user,who is the most
powerful.You CHOOSE which skills each charcter gets.Skills along with magic and
everything actually improved with use.You could combine the different materia
to produce many different effects.You could infuse your sword with the power of
fire for example.
FF 3 had a weak villian in Kefka.He was your typical power-hungry madman
clown.Sephiroth is one of the coolest villians ever.He is extremly evil and his
motivations and background are awesome and very original.
All the chracters are fleshed out alot more in FF 7 .3 optional hours are spent
learning about just the main character,Cloud's background alone.You never
really learn what his true background is until the very end.You are lead down
many paths only for it to take many twists and turns.I thought it was extremly
well done.The other characters each have at least one hour just learning about
their pasts and they all have interesting pasts.FF 3's characters had decent
personality and backgrounds but they didn't come close to the depth of FF 7's
characters.
The plot was much better in FF 7.I don't see how people can possibly even
COMPARE FF 3's cliche ridden "simple" plot to FF 7's deep,original plot.I mean
come in the 2nd half of FF 3,there practically was hardly even a plot at all!
In FF 7,just think back to all the characters backgrounds especially Cloud's
and Sephiroth's and think back to Jenova, Shin-Ra, The Turks, The "Weapons",
Holy, Meteor,Aeris' "sacrafice" and all the other many,many other sub-plots.
Mini-games were pretty much non-existent in FF 3 except for the little
"strategy" battles and the Coloseum(which sucked).In FF 7, mini-games that are
laced throughout the game really add to the experience. Snowboarding, submarine
battle, Battle Arena, Chocobo breeding and racing, the real-time strategy game,
mortycyle chase, all the neat little games at the Gold Saucer were all fun
little "time-killers" and really added to the play-time.
Of course,all this is just my opinion.
Gunawan Agus
Belial XX wrote:
> >and delivers many new features which will probally be in future >FF games.
>
> FF games are always very innovative.For example,you breed,raise,breed and race
> these animals called Chocobos.You equip these materia which give you ablities
> to summon different elementals,gain skills,increase stats,etc.The game is chock
> full of mini-games like a real-time strategy game,a motorcycle chase,submarine
> battle,etc.These are just a few examples of many of the innovatie things
> found.
I hardly find any of the mini-games innovative, I even consider them a
waste of time: a waste of our time and square's time. chocobo has been
there since early ff series. some people find that breeding them is
fine. i found it's tenous. there's no fun to it because it's too
simple. Playability factor for the chocobo breeding? I am giving it 3
out of 10. I was simply relieved once I got the golden chocobo, never
again I'm going to do that menial tasks again!! How about the other
mini-games? The real-time strategy game is as basic as
rock-paper-scissor and not much more than that. very boring, 2 out of
10. The army-marching-thingy is another tired take on simon says, 2 out
of 10. The chocobo race is ho-hum, 4 out of 10. the arcade games at
golden eggs(??), most are based on overused ploys: "press button as fast
as possible", "time your shot", and there's even the "guess a number"
(the mogg mating). the most fun is the "road rash" thing, even that is
kind of boring after a couple minutes. i came out of the game feeling
that people over at square were spending too much time on the graphics
and not enough on playability and storyline. there were too may of
these contrite mini-games, the storyline lacks focus and riddled with
cliche, the skill/item system is tedious (as opposed to time consuming
but fun). i really wish they would spend more time on fun concepts like
ff3's street fighter control, sword techniques, and better
screenplay/translation. i think the final product has a feel of being
rushed: the 3D characters never stopped overacting and the dialogue are
overdramatic, the storyline is made up as you go (anything can happen
when you're on that bad dude's trail right? - good excuse to throw a
bunch of meaningless adventures in and sell them as a string of relevant
adventures), the skill system is too tedious (are you still having fun
rearranging your materias for the hundredth time?), and there is hardly
any new concept at all when you compare ff7 to ff3.
> >It also proves that fancy looking graphics aren't what makes a >game good. In
> case of Final Fantasy 7, well they made that game >through graphics,
>
> No,actually it was made through plot.That is what the FF series is famous
> for,plots and FF 7 is no exception.In fact I think it has the best plot in the
> series and one of the most original and well-developed plots ever.Gameplay is
> also top-notch.Yes,the graphics are breath-taking but Square NEVER will rely
> on graphics for their games.They have a HUGE reputation to live to in Japan and
> they try(and succeed)to make the best possible game they can make and since
> they are one of the most talented developers in the world,that is saying a hell
> of alot.
i agree that square is one of the better game-makers out there. tobal
no.2 is good. that samurai thing (forgot what it's called) is strange, i
still don't get it, but it's something different. front mission is a
lot of fun. chrono triggers is entertaining. secret of mana is very
enjoyable. i'm sure going to get the upcoming front mission alternative
and ff tactics when they are released.
however, none of those had anything to do with ff7 being falls short of
expectation (my expectation, at least) and come on, square is betting a
lot on this graphics thingy. did you see their advertisement? they are
showing off the graphics with the "eat-your-heart-out" kind of theme.
they spent only one year making this game, the bulk of which, i'm
guessing, was spent on the graphics - 2D drawings, designing characters,
etc... the port to english was slow because they want to add more
bosses, therefore, more drawings, while the translation process was
rushed. also, with one year worth of attention, that story has got to
be better than that... they story is basically a lego-building of
previous RPGs' lego-story-blocks. you know what's gonna happen, you
just don't know when. you know somebody is gonna die (and probably can
be resurrected back, but not in this case), you know we're gonna get all
the background stories for all these characters and that they all have
something to prove/to get: the outcast, the revenge, the finding of true
light, whatever, and they'll get it. you know there's a secret island
somewhere with secret items to help you winning your battles even more
mindlessly and time-consuming (the summon animations).
i kept reading people blasting others for not playing this game or not
playing it enough when they voiced their displeasure at it. i think
it's the other way around. it's those people who have played a lot of
these kind of games and the previous ff series who are disappointed with
ff7. i have played all square's english-translated rpgs, plus all the
other major console rpg series (lufia, breath of fire, enix's, etc.) and
trust me, ff7 is only a recognizable milestone for its graphics, which
in turns is not surprising since it comes on 3 CDs. in a way, i kind of
wished they would stick with nintendo since the tight storage limitation
would force them to concentrate more on the game mechanics rather than
pretty pictures. compared to ff3, ff7 is just a cheap thrill.
wan
Gunawan Agus
Belial XX wrote:
> In FF 3 you had little in the way of choosing how your characters are made
> up.For example they all had their own skills that only they had and no one else
> could use.In FF 7, you CHOOSE who is the main magic-user,who is the most
> powerful.You CHOOSE which skills each charcter gets.Skills along with magic and
> everything actually improved with use.You could combine the different materia
> to produce many different effects.You could infuse your sword with the power of
> fire for example.
yesh... but this makes a very tired practice. let's count the many ways
that might lead you to juggling the materias again:
- when you switched characters: those summon materias gotta be used by
someone!
- when you get a new weapon: connected slot or non-connected, double or
not, more slots or less
- when you get a new materia
- when your materia is gaining level: you might want to rotate them
very soon, i started making up my own characters strengths, for example,
aerith is my best healer, so the best ALL materia and HEAL materia go
with her, etc. this way, it cut down the time for me to ponder these
issues of materia allocation. sure, it seems like the more freedom the
better it is.. but not this time. i think the designers are copping out
of designing something new and fun, and instead, they gave us more
"freedom" and disguise it as a new system. also remember, ff3 is made
before ff7. did you see anything new and significant added from ff3 to
ff7? not me.
> FF 3's characters had decent
> personality and backgrounds but they didn't come close to the depth of FF 7's
> characters.
i think that's because ff7 is on 3 CDs and the story can be long. as
all of you might know, a longer story is not always better. i truly
felt for the swordmaster in FF3 when the baddies poisoned the castle
water and killed his family and his rage leads him to discovering the
best swords technique ever! however, don't pull the same thing on me
just because that last one worked! moreover, instead of getting an
effective 2 minutes flashback sequence, we got a 10 minutes overdrawn
overdramatic one since the space to do so is there. also, the
background stories are all subject to closer inspection. for example,
why is the black dude getting blamed for his village getting burned? i
can't believe that the villagers would be so moronic to blame him for
something he can't control. it's just a way to create an outcast, i
guess. what is the turks motivation anyway? would these kind of
characters exist in real life? these people are here for filler,
comic-relief, or whatever.. they just pop out everywhere, like the
doggie in "hot shots" (starring charlie sheen).
> The plot was much better in FF 7.I don't see how people can possibly even
> COMPARE FF 3's cliche ridden "simple" plot to FF 7's deep,original plot.I mean
> come in the 2nd half of FF 3,there practically was hardly even a plot at all!
> In FF 7,just think back to all the characters backgrounds especially Cloud's
> and Sephiroth's and think back to Jenova, Shin-Ra, The Turks, The "Weapons",
> Holy, Meteor,Aeris' "sacrafice" and all the other many,many other sub-plots.
ff3 is the pioneer and ff7 just redoing it in full-3CDs-force. again,
ff3 is the first in a lot of ways. the stronger plot, multi-group,
mutliple skill, multiple character, mini-games, etc. of course, if you
look at them right now, at face value, it will be like comparing ultima
7 with ultima 4.
those of you who have never played ff series before, get ff7! it's the
pinnacle of the series. i'm just griping because it's not that much
improved from ff3, which is irrelevant if you have never played it.
> Of course,all this is just my opinion.
same here.
wan
Belial XX
>>however, none of those had anything to do with ff7 being falls
>>short of expectation (my expectation, at least) and come on,
>>square is betting alot on this graphics thingy. did you see their
>>advertisement? they are showing off the graphics with the
>>"eat-your-heart-out" kind of theme.
That was Sony of America's advertisment.All this hype was done by Sony,not
Square.
>they spent only one year making this game, the bulk of which, i'm
>guessing, was spent on the graphics - 2D drawings, designing characters,
>etc...
The game took 3 years to make and a little less than a 1 year to translate.
> the port to english was slow because they want to add more
>bosses, therefore, more drawings, while the translation process was
>rushed.
I thought the translation was one of the better console RPGs translations.In
the past,all the cussing,"adult themes",etc. were cut out to keep American
gamers "safe".Entire scenes were cut.Not so in this case with FF 7.They kept
everything for the most part except they censored the "heavier" cuss words.The
dialouge I thought was alot more interesting than most "dry" translations done
to most Japanese-to-English translations.
>also, with one year worth of attention, that story has got to
>be better than that... they story is basically a lego-building of
>previous RPGs' lego-story-blocks. you know what's gonna happen, you
>just don't know when. you know somebody is gonna die (and probably can
>be resurrected back, but not in this case), you know we're gonna get all
>the background stories for all these characters and that they all have
>something to prove/to get: the outcast, the revenge, the finding of true
>light, whatever, and they'll get it. you know there's a secret island
>somewhere with secret items to help you winning your battles even more
>mindlessly and time-consuming (the summon animations).
******SPOILER********
I don't agree with that at all.You are part of a terroritst group who is
trying to overthrow a corrupt *business* corporation who is builing Energy
reactors to suck the planet dry of energy.Where have you seen anything close to
that?What about the hero of the story being a *clone*.Sephiroth is about as
evil and cool as a villian can get and his background isn't the mad
power-hungry villian cliche found in most RPGs.I don't know about you but
when Aeries dies that was a big shock.That came out of nowhere.How could you
have possibly anticipated that?Sure the outline of the plot is basically from
past games but I think they take it to a new level of complexity.
********END SPOILER*********
>i kept reading people blasting others for not playing this game or not
>playing it enough when they voiced their displeasure at it. i think
>it's the other way around. it's those people who have played a lot of
>these kind of games and the previous ff series who are disappointed with
>ff7. i have played all square's english-translated rpgs, plus all the
>other major console rpg series (lufia, breath of fire, enix's, etc.) and
>trust me, ff7 is only a recognizable milestone for its graphics,
I have also played most console RPGs.I mostly only play Console RPGs,now.I
used to be a die-hard PC RPG player but I just found the *story-driven* plots
of the Console RPGs much more to my taste and also then there pretty much
weren't any PC RPGs anyway(that is changing now,thankfully) so I slowly shifted
over to Console RPGs and played all the SNES and Genesis RPGs and then the PSX
and Saturn ones so I definitly have my experience in Console RPGs.Anyways,I
think FF 7 is one of the better ones in terms of plot,game-play and neat little
things added to it that show the designers care about the game they are
making.I really don't care about graphics in an RPG.Whether they are good or
bad makes really makes no difference to me so me liking FF 7 so much had
nothing to do with the graphics.
> which in turns is not surprising since it comes on 3 CDs. in a way, i kind
of
>wished they would stick with nintendo since the tight storage limitation
>would force them to concentrate more on the game mechanics rather than
>pretty pictures. compared to ff3, ff7 is just a cheap thrill.
I am probably one of the few people who actually thought FF 3 was just barely
above average.The 1st half of the game was pretty good but once the 2nd half
came I thought the game compeltly fell apart.The game had some good moments but
overall I just really didn't care for it that much at all.I thought it was
Square's weakest non-NES game ever.
Max C. Strini
In article <348E5EB0...@flash.net>,
Gunawan Agus <wan...@flash.net> wrote:
> Now, the things I found sux about the game:
>
> - The storyline is way way way too dramatic and it's cliche-ridden. How
> many more 'outcast turned hero' or 'friend turned to foe, foe turned to
> friend' can we endure?
I'm not sure exactly what you're talking about here. Any story can be
reduced to a collection of common "elements" if one tries hard enough.
FF7's story is interesting in many ways; the 'reunion' scenes of Cloud
and Sephiroth impressed me more than any other scenes I have seen in any
other game, and I enjoyed the "/inochi/" ("life") themes of the game.
The story is certainly better than the other FF games, although compared
to something like Ultima V or VII it might not seem very impressive.
>
> - Shallow characters. Like power rangers and ninja turtles, these
> characters are best defined by their costumes, styles of fighting, and
> weapons of choice. Even the fighting styles are not that different, a
> far cry from previous FF installments. There's also the infamous (and
> irritating) ebonics that the one big black dude is using.
Um, I don't understand this one at all either. Most of the characters
had very well defined personalities and background stories, more so than
in previous FF games. Don't tell me that Cloud was defined more by his
"costume" and "fighting style" than his interesting backstory and
confused personality. (Actually, someone said that the FF7 characters
all had one thing in common: they needed mental help. Heh...)
>
> - Cumbersome item/weapon management, specifically the materias.
> Materias are magical rocks that can be 'installed' to your weapons which
> will grant you magic spells that was stored within it. These materias
> have experience points and will grow in abilities when they gain
> levels. The thing is, you can only have 3 characters (out of 8)
> playable at any one time, which means that you have to rotate/juggle the
> 30+ or 40+ materias that you might have. Every weapon has a different
> type of materia holder and you have to spend quite some time arranging
> these materias when you upgrade your weapons. Major drag.
Um, how is it a drag? Isn't more detailed, complex party management a
*good* thing? I love the materia system, even more than the job system
of FF5 (although the latter is better implemented)
> - Graphics is good at first, then it becomes annoying. Sure, the
> graphics looks impressive for the first 10 hours or so.. then it really
> gets to you. Most of the time, you will spend your exploration on a
> beautifully drawn 2D map with your 3D character moving on it. There
> must be hundreds of these 2D backgrounds and some of them are drawn from
> a questionable perspective that at the end just serves to confuse you
> when you have to navigate your characters on it. During combat, your
> characters and the enemy are 3D, plus your spell and weapons. Some of
> the more powerful materias can summon gods to strike on the baddies.
> The animation for these summoning are unbelieaveably good! BUT they last
> for 40 seconds or so, and there's no way to skip them when you've seen
> them 100 times already. This makes a very slow gameplay.
Um, but you're not going to see them 100 times, since you can only use
them once in a battle, they take too much MP to be practically used
against enemies other than bosses, you're not going to be equipping many
at once due to HP penalties, and you're constantly getting new ones.
>
> - Character skill advancement is too artificial. Every character has a
> new 'break limit', or special techniques that can be learnt through
> practicing the previously acquired skills. Now, this is fine if the
> combat is interesting and requires your attention, but most of the time,
> you can just press one button (X in PSX) and switch your TV to cable to
> catch Jay Leno's monologue, back in 5 minutes, and you won't miss a
> thing.
Um, I really have no idea what you're talking about here (how does the
presence of limit breaks make combat tedious?) so I won't comment.
>
> - Basically the exact it's from the exact same mold as the previous
> console RPG. When FF3 (or FF4) was out, it was exciting. For the first
> time, you can control more than one party.
Are you talking about FF6? This feature had already been seen in FF5.
> For the first time, you have
> characters with special moves that're truly special (street fighter
> control, tools, gambling, copycat, etc.)
The "Street Fighter" blitz command was one of the most inane,
unnecessary and meaningless "features" I have ever seen in a game, and I
am truly glad that it's gone in FF7. In any case, FF6 was an
even-numbered FF game, so of course the special abilities were based on
the characters in your party.
> That game is a marked improvement from the previous FF installments.
Actually, it was huge step down from FF5. FF7 is slightly better than
FF6, but still doesn't compare to FF5.
> FF7, on the other hand,
> is same old same old. See is this is familiar to you: walking on the
> desert, can't cross shallow water, get the hovercraft, can't cross
> mountain, get a plane, can't cross higher mountain, upgrade the plane,
> can't go up to the moon, etc...
Naming one game element that exists in two games does not somehow
demonstrate that one game is a clone of the other. FF7 had a somewhat
innovative story and very innovative storytelling; it was the first FF to
be a combination of both the even-numbered and odd-numbered FF series; it
featured more dynamic battles than FF6, at least; and it was generally
quite interesting in many ways., although it can't compare to FF5.
-MARKETING-
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
akaroth
Belial XX wrote:
> > compared to ff3, ff7 is just a cheap thrill.
Agreed.
> I am probably one of the few people who actually thought FF 3 was just
> barely above average.The 1st half of the game was pretty good but once
> the 2nd half came I thought the game compeltly fell apart.The game had
> some good moments but overall I just really didn't care for it that
> much at all.I thought it was Square's weakest non-NES game ever.
Agh! Why do so many people feel this way about the WoR? Can they just
not handle the idea of complete non-linearity in an RPG? The WoR _made_
FF3 for me, and I was saddened to find no comprable idea presented in
FF7.
MCBad4Life
>No,actually it was made through plot.That is what the FF series is famous
>for,plots and FF 7 is no exception.In fact I think it has the best plot in
>the
>series and one of the most original and well-developed plots ever.Gameplay is
>also top-notch.Yes,the graphics are breath-taking but Square NEVER will
>rely
>on graphics for their games.They have a HUGE reputation to live to in Japan
>and
>they try(and succeed)to make the best possible game they can make and since
>they are one of the most talented developers in the world,that is saying a
>hell
>of alot.
So what you are saying is that if Final Fantasy 7 had the graphics of Final
Fantasy 3 it would still have been a huge hit? Think again pal.
Bad For Life,
MC
P.S: While it may be futuristic it remains with the _fantasy_ theme.
Belial XX
>Agh! Why do so many people feel this way about the WoR? Can they just
>not handle the idea of complete non-linearity in an RPG? The WoR _made_
>FF3 for me, and I was saddened to find no comprable idea presented in
>FF7.
I loved the very non-linear RPGs Arena,Daggerfall,Wasteland,etc. so yes I can
"handle" non-linearity in an RPG.IMO,it just doesn't work in most Console RPGs
especailly the FF series.
Gunawan Agus
Belial XX wrote:
> >> they are showing off the graphics with the
> >>"eat-your-heart-out" kind of theme.
> Square.
i am kind of confused about this too. i've seen ff7 japanese ads which
are very elegant and low key, just like the opening of the game, but
i've also seen the one where they show off the graphics. as you
mentioned in your previous post, ff series is very big in japan, and i
think everybody there know well beforehand, from the
hypes/previews/etc., that the graphics is going to be mind-blowing.
therefore square can afford to do a low-key advertisement. of course,
in US, sony had to introduce the series and they have no choice but to
push the graphics.
> >they spent only one year making this game, the bulk of which, i'm
> >guessing, was spent on the graphics - 2D drawings, designing characters,
> >etc...
>
> The game took 3 years to make and a little less than a 1 year to translate.
hmm.. i read in gaming magazines that the effort for the japanese
version took about 1+ year, then there's this huge delay of porting it
to english and the reasons given were square was adding more stuff
(bosses, etc) for the us version. probably if you count the planning
for the game, which started right after ff3 was released, then you can
come up with the 3 years number, but i don't think that's an accurate
way to measure the development time. i read somewhere that ff8 has
already started "thought of" but there's no full-force development in
progress yet. then again, i read those 6 months ago, so they might be
doing it now.
> I thought the translation was one of the better console RPGs translations.In
> the past,all the cussing,"adult themes",etc. were cut out to keep American
> gamers "safe".Entire scenes were cut.Not so in this case with FF 7.They kept
> everything for the most part except they censored the "heavier" cuss words.The
> dialouge I thought was alot more interesting than most "dry" translations done
> to most Japanese-to-English translations.
i definitely have to disagree on this one. ff3 was translated by square
of america by someone (forgot his name) who seems to understand the two
cultures very well and were able to bridge a gap between them. the
translation for ff7, and this is a fact, was rushed and was done in
japan (therefore the ebonics hoopla). there were no reason offered why
they didn't seek help from the same guy who did ff3. the ebonics thing
is very big to me, not because of any politically correct reason, but it
tells me that whoever is doing the translation is not in touch with the
current american pop-culture. the e-thing is neither realistic nor
entertaining.
again, this is all very subjective, but overall, i think the translation
was very dry and too serious. the big big difference between ff3 and
ff7 is that ff3 never took itself too seriously and treated the subject
matter very lightly. it only pushes the dramatic moments at the right
time so it has more impact on you rather than ff7's style of 60+ hours
of supposedly taut & high-brow story line when every moment is a live
and death situation. you know what i mean if you are more scared by the
t-rex in tomb raider than by any of the monsters in quake. sometimes
less is better.
> I have also played most console RPGs.I mostly only play Console RPGs,now.I
> used to be a die-hard PC RPG player but I just found the *story-driven* plots
> of the Console RPGs much more to my taste and also then there pretty much
> weren't any PC RPGs anyway(that is changing now,thankfully) so I slowly shifted
> over to Console RPGs and played all the SNES and Genesis RPGs and then the PSX
> and Saturn ones so I definitly have my experience in Console RPGs.Anyways,I
> think FF 7 is one of the better ones in terms of plot,game-play and neat little
> things added to it that show the designers care about the game they are
> making.I really don't care about graphics in an RPG.Whether they are good or
> bad makes really makes no difference to me so me liking FF 7 so much had
> nothing to do with the graphics.
i enjoy gaming on both pc and console because theie games definitely
have different flavors. i also have nothing against a story-drive or
linear rpg but i just wished they would come up with something new once
in while. before i played ff7, i played wild arms, lufia 2, and breath
of fire 2 (or 3), and suikoden. all these rpgs basically follow the
same way to tell a story (except suikoden, which unfortunately sux big
time), and the worse thing is, the story are all weak and forgettable.
i think ff7 has a much better story than any of those games, but it's
just way too long. i mean there's enough story to fill a 2 hours movie,
or maybe even 3 hours, but the gameplay takes more than 60 hours. i
found it rather discouraging that i have to fight numerous easy battles,
juggling materias, trying to understand the gist of the story from all
the overblown emotions that were thrown at you, and then the you can
advance about an inch on the story line. by the 60th hours, i just
wanted the game to end and i've spent so much time on the mindless
fightings that it allowed me to guess/think of more than one possible
background stories for cloud and unfortunately, one of them was correct.
wan
Gunawan Agus
> Belial XX wrote:
>
> > I am probably one of the few people who actually thought FF 3 was just
> > barely above average.The 1st half of the game was pretty good but once
> > the 2nd half came I thought the game compeltly fell apart.The game had
> > some good moments but overall I just really didn't care for it that
> > much at all.I thought it was Square's weakest non-NES game ever.
>
> not handle the idea of complete non-linearity in an RPG? The WoR _made_
> FF3 for me, and I was saddened to find no comprable idea presented in
> FF7.
the second half of ff3 is another one of "firsts" that ff3 pioneers.
back then, it was unthinkable that a console RPG can be non-linear (but
it can! look at the 7th Saga). i like to think that ff3 was holding my
hand through the first half of the game, giving me a tour of what the
places like, who are the characters, and so forth, and then they start
ripping the world apart and they throw you in the middle of it with some
degree of freedom and let you figure the rest by yourself.
of course, if you prefer a story-driven rpg more than a non-linear one,
then the second half will be less entertaining than the first half.
otherwise, i thought it was a very interesting experiment that works!
wan
MCBad4Life
I agree no matter how you look at it Final Fanasy 7 doesn't compare to Fallout,
or any other Square RPG game. The graphics sold the game and that's the bottom
line.
Bad For Life,
MC
Aaron D. Thompson
MCBad4Life wrote:
Well "MC" that is your opinion. I can't believe people are actually saying
FF7 is unoriginal. How many of you have actually played the damn game all
the way through? I have played a ton of RPGs, and FF7s plot is about the
most original one I've seen. You call Fallout original? Post-holocaust
RPG... hmmm...Wasteland? I don't even like the theme of Fallout,
post-holocaust mutant stuff is boring and it has been done before anyway. I
prefer the "fantasy crap" myself, even though FF7 doesn't really take place
in true "fantasy" (read: medieval/sword-and-sorcery type) setting.
Jonathan Jason Sy (PanDuh!)
Fred Quattrone <fr...@erols.com> wrote in article
<01bd0572$0bfad340$45d4f20a@ntw_quattrof>...
> The reason no one complains about it here is because this is a forum for
PC
> games not PSX games. When it is finally released for PC, you will see the
> complaints. I personally do not think that this game will make it on the
PC
> platform. There are too many things in this game that CPRG players do not
> like. The save game feature is terrible and there are many action and
timed
> sequences. While FF7 has many fine points (Comabat is fun) it has many
sore
> points. My main problem is that the game is too linear. Almost everything
> has to be done in sequence. I guess we will se what happens when it is
> released.
I think playing FF7 was basically like watching a long japanese animation,
except that you get to fight the fights... not much thinking involved. But
its interesting and certainly very pretty.
--
PanDuh!
http://pages.nyu.edu/~jjs7011
Ian
"Aaron D. Thompson" <got...@jurai.org> wrote:
>Comparing FF7 to Fallout is a joke. IMO, Fallout isn't that good at all.
>People are just hyping it because it's the first halfway decent RPG for the
>PC in quite some time. In terms of depth of story, and overall fun factor,
>FF7 is the best.
Fallout isn't overhyped... it is _seriously_ good. Now I haven't played any
Final Fantasy games since I and II (for Nintendo... my opinion of those
games was that while they were graphically pretty, they didn't hold a candle
to the CRPGs I was playing at the time, such as the AD&D Gold Box games for
my Apple IIc), but Fallout is a REALLY REALLY good game. It's one of those
games that doesn't just have the latest technology and decent gameplay, but
has a great storyline (and it really is great - Fallout's SF storyline is a
lot better and more original than the average SF _novel_, and it's well
researched as well, it takes a thorough knowledge of genetics to poke holes
in the stuff they're doing with the mutants for example). It has great
_balance_, and there's nothing generic, all locations have great detail.
It is the best CRPG to come out in a while, but it's not just that. When the
Gold Box games came out, I didn't enjoy them quite as much. Bards Tale
doesn't hold a candle to it, Arena and Daggerfall don't hold a candle to it.
For one thing it has _atmosphere_, defined as both having a unique
atmosphere and making you feel like you're there, to a degree greater than
even my previous atmsophere favorites (SSI's Ravenloft games, first ones I
played which combined both good engine, atmospheric graphics, sounds and
soundtrack).
This is a lot more than "gee, this is the first good CRPG to come out in a
long time". I, and a fair number of other people, look on it as superior to
even our Grand Old CRPGs, the games like the Gold Boxes, Wasteland, Ultima
and the first Wizardry games, that people tend to unfavorably compare CRPGs
of late to. I only wish there was more of it! (Fallout is a CRPG of about
average length, neither an endless dungeon/travelfest like Bethesda's
offerings nor a hundred-our epic like Wizardry 7). However this may actually
have to do with its quality as well - there isn't a lot of "padding" like
there is in many CRPGs, there's no feeling that you have to spend many hours
doing something only halfway interesting just because it's there to give the
game more "play value". They managed to make basically every quest and
setting unique.
Ian
"Aaron D. Thompson" <got...@jurai.org> wrote:
>MCBad4Life wrote:
>
>>I agree no matter how you look at it Final Fanasy 7 doesn't compare >to
>Fallout, or any other Square RPG game. The graphics sold the >game and
>that's the bottom line.
>
>Well "MC" that is your opinion. I can't believe people are actually saying
>FF7 is unoriginal. How many of you have actually played the damn game all
>the way through? I have played a ton of RPGs, and FF7s plot is about the
>most original one I've seen. You call Fallout original? Post-holocaust
>RPG... hmmm...Wasteland?
Actually while I haven't finished playing through Wasteland, Fallout is
quite different (and the story is one HECK of a lot better... Wasteland is
actually somewhat of a hackneyed take on a post-holocaust world, while
Fallout's storyline is impressive enough that it compares favorably to the
plotline of many SF novels).
And anyway "post-holocaust world" is just the _setting_... and it's a much
more "open" setting than those of most RPGs. In fact it's indicative that
there is _only one_ game out there with a comparable setting, a game which
happens to be about a decade old. The story of Fallout is no more about "gee
we're in a post-holocaust world" than that of the average fantasy CRPG is
about "gee we're in a magical world with dragons and gods". The story in
Fallout is about the Vault-dwellers, the Mutants, and and about life long
after a large scale nuclear war in the 21st century. Incidentally while
Fallout is an unoffocial sequel to Wasteland, the backgrounds are quite
different... Wasteland civilization was formed by an isolated group of
rangers, following a nuclear war in 1998 between NATO and the Warsaw Pact
over some SDI satellite. The pre-holocaust world was like an 80s
technothriller, that time's common idea of life around the turn of the
century. In the world of Fallout, the nuclear war happened between unknown
factions at around 2081, in a world both more technologically advanced and
with a different social motif from the present. The survivors of the war
were those who had lived in the large underground Vaults and Vault-like
military bases. There are some things close to this if you look to literary
SF, but not tremendously close. Vault-like life is described in a book whose
title I can't remember, but it's in French anyway so most people probably
have not read it. Long-term post holocaust stories like Fallout's world
actually aren't all that common in SF, and the presence of the FEV and the
Mutants was rather original.
>I don't even like the theme of Fallout,
>post-holocaust mutant stuff is boring
You may personally find it boring, but there is nothing intrinsically boring
about it. I find it intriguing.
>and it has been done before anyway.
Actually, no, it's actually fairly rare (as opposed to simple-minded
post-holocaust worlds in which there are a bunch of hideous
radiation-mutated freaks roaming around, which the "mutants" of Fallout are
most assuredly not). In CRPGs the closest thing is Wasteland (unsurprising,
since this game is the unofficial sequel to Wasteland), and in SF there are
very few stories much like it.
Ian
"Scott Lewis" <gt3...@prism.gatech.edu> wrote:
>>Comparing FF7 to Fallout is a joke. IMO, Fallout isn't that good at all.
>>People are just hyping it because it's the first halfway decent RPG for the
>>PC in quite some time. In terms of depth of story, and overall fun factor,
>>FF7 is the best.
>
>
>What Final Fantasy is lacking is a thing called good ole American ROLE
>playing. The best American games have multiple paths, multiple ways of
>doing things, and actually let the player change the world and possibly
>alter the path of the game away from the main story line. (Such as the
>billions of mini-quests in Wasteland, signing on with Blackthorne in Ultima
>V.) Heck, even Diablo had multiple different characters you could play to
>change the game.
Yes, in most Final Fantasy games (except, at least, the very first) you
basically play NPCs - pregenerated characters. A big appeal of "real" RPGs
is that they involve creating your own character. This is a big appeal. In
Daggerfall, one of the big selling points was that you have a huge number of
options in creating your own character, including special powers and totally
custom classes. In Fallout this also plays a _tremendous_ role. You can
create the "average" jack of all trades, unusually good at combat CRPG
character and play through a decent game. Or, you can make a primarily
diplomatic character, or a sneaky thief, or tactically astute sniper, and
have a _very_ different game. One of Fallout's best points is that you can
create your own characterm, with tremendous variety available, develop them
as you wish, and you will actually have a VERY different game depending on
what your character is like. You won't notice this if you play an "average"
combat-oriented character and leave it at that, but a good diplomat can
charm his way through almost anything (if you use your own brains too). You
can play an evil bruiser type, and win the game by walking around killing
literally anything that moves... or you can play a sneaky type, use your
brain, and beat the game without so much as firing a single shot. Now THAT
is something you will not find in any other CRPG.
MCBad4Life
>Well "MC" that is your opinion. I can't believe people are >actually saying
FF7 is unoriginal. How many of you have actually >played the damn game all the
way through? I have played a ton >of RPGs, and FF7s plot is about the most
original one I've seen. >You call Fallout original? Post-holocaust RPG...
>hmmm...Wasteland?
Well, Wasteland is an un-official prequel to Fallout so I can see where
similarities in the story arise, but then again as Ian (a poster) pionted out
there are a lot of differences. I never did say FF7 was un-original, but I did
say that the graphics sold the game, because it's the thruth. Take those away
and you don't have a hit. Fallout on the other hand wasn't disgned with
graphics on the mind. Though I would like to see some sharper clearer graphics
I wouldn't want it unless the other elements of the game remain equally good if
not better. I bet you are much like the person that went of on Next-Generation
magazine when they didn't include FF7 in their Top 25 Break-Through games. The
irony of that situation was the moron complaining failed to realize the article
was for upcommiog and unreleased games ONLY. Just a matter of opinion. See you
in the Vault pal.
Bad For Life,
MC
Vortex
I bought a PSX just for FF7, and it was one of the greatest games I've ever
played. I enjoyed myself throughout the story, and was awed by the
fantastic FMV sequences. But now that I've finished it, I have absolutely
no desire to go back and play it again. I played through it twice, and the
second time, while not unpleasant, served only to refresh my memory and view
the FMV's over again. The game is so completely linear that it has no
replay value. You are led by the nose from start to finish, with few
distractions along the way. I did get the strat guide, but the optional
characters and hidden locations were minimal, and contributed little to the
adventure. The only diversion worth mentioning was the breeding of
chocobos; eventually I found that to be pointless, too. Basically, all you
need to do is get one gold chocobo, and then you can go get the Knights of
the Round Table (powerful attack spell). After many generations of
breeding, I found that the game would not let my chocobos advance beyond a
speed of 149 and an endurance of 999. While this is enough to blow away the
usual s-class competition, it's still galling that Teioh gets to ride a 174
/ 1249 speedster. So now that I'm through with it, I wonder: will any more
good RPGs come out for the PSX? If not, it's time to sell mine and get back
to PC gaming. Don't get the wrong impression, though, FF7 was a wonderful
experience! Lastly, to those of you who are waiting for FF7 on the PC, it's
going to be terrible, and here's why: ports are usually bad (not just
poorly programmed, but the designers always seem to "cater" to American
tastes by removing all the coolest parts; American PSX FF7 was very lucky
in that the translators did not "gut" the product), this is Square's 1st PC
game, and the programmers have been recruited off the street by ads in
gaming mags.
Kevin
Vortex (Mor...@Gawain.com) wrote:
: / 1249 speedster. So now that I'm through with it, I wonder: will any more
: good RPGs come out for the PSX? If not, it's time to sell mine and get back
Alundra is supposed to be good, with more fighter game style combat. Also,
Square will come out with Parasyte Eve, a horror rpg based in NYC. Messiah
sounds interesting. Battle Angel Alita/GUNNM is supposedly being turned
into an RPG game. I bought the PSX just for FF7 as well, and am keeping
it purely for RPG, since the other platforms are pretty weak for RPG, and
I have no time or need for another game machine. The only RPG I'm looking
forward to on the PC is Return to Krondor. I'm curious to see what Sierra
will do with 7th Level's work.
Kevin
Kevin
Vortex (Mor...@Gawain.com) wrote:
: / 1249 speedster. So now that I'm through with it, I wonder: will any more
: good RPGs come out for the PSX? If not, it's time to sell mine and get back
Ooops, I also forgot about the Final Fantasy Tactics game for the PSX.
Supposedly it's a more strategy based Final Fantasy with RPG elements
like character evolution.
Kevin
Ziffel
I am an avid PC gamer, but I bought a Sony Playstation and FF7 on impulse
one day.
In 4 days I returned it (the PSX and the game), utterly baffled ("what the
hell was that?!"). FF7 was very confusing and foreign to me, and left me
swearing never to buy a console system again. It was one of the least fun
games I've ever played.
Fallout on the other hand is a true RPG and is incredibly fun to play. The
turn-based combat system takes me back to my high-school days of playing
AD&D. If Diablo had Fallout's combat system, and character creation
flexibility, I'd never have stopped playing it.
Fallout is excellent!
Kay-Yut Chen
On Tue, 16 Dec 1997 19:35:51 GMT, k...@netcom.com (Kevin) wrote:
>Vortex (Mor...@Gawain.com) wrote:
>: / 1249 speedster. So now that I'm through with it, I wonder: will any more
>: good RPGs come out for the PSX? If not, it's time to sell mine and get back
>
> Alundra is supposed to be good, with more fighter game style combat. Also,
>Square will come out with Parasyte Eve, a horror rpg based in NYC. Messiah
>sounds interesting. Battle Angel Alita/GUNNM is supposedly being turned
>into an RPG game. I bought the PSX just for FF7 as well, and am keeping
>it purely for RPG, since the other platforms are pretty weak for RPG, and
>I have no time or need for another game machine. The only RPG I'm looking
>forward to on the PC is Return to Krondor. I'm curious to see what Sierra
>will do with 7th Level's work.
>
>Kevin
>
Yeah! Gunnm is one of my favorite manga. It is probably the best
written, best drawn hard sci-fi manga out there. Let's hope they will
make a PC version.
Roger Christie
MCBad4Life wrote:
>
> I agree no matter how you look at it Final Fanasy 7 doesn't compare to Fallout,
> or any other Square RPG game. The graphics sold the game and that's the bottom
> line.
>
> MC
I disagree. I think the story sells it. At least it does for me.
The storyline in Fallout did nothing for me, it was strictly
how-hum. I found the story in FF7 to be quite compelling.
--
+=======================================+
Microsoft: Where do you want to go today?
Linux: Been there, done that.
Roger Christie
rog...@castle.ultranet.com
arathorn@Castle D'Image MUSH
+======================================+
Aaron D. Thompson
Yes, there are some good RPGs coming for the PSX soon -- namely Alundra,
Final Fantasy Tactics (Strategy/RPG), and SaGa Frontier. Don't sell that PSX
yet!
John Vu
Kevin wrote:
>
> Vortex (Mor...@Gawain.com) wrote:
> : / 1249 speedster. So now that I'm through with it, I wonder: will any more
> : good RPGs come out for the PSX? If not, it's time to sell mine and get back
>
> Alundra is supposed to be good, with more fighter game style combat. Also,
> Square will come out with Parasyte Eve, a horror rpg based in NYC. Messiah
> sounds interesting. Battle Angel Alita/GUNNM is supposedly being turned
> into an RPG game. I bought the PSX just for FF7 as well, and am keeping
> it purely for RPG, since the other platforms are pretty weak for RPG, and
> I have no time or need for another game machine. The only RPG I'm looking
> forward to on the PC is Return to Krondor. I'm curious to see what Sierra
> will do with 7th Level's work.
>
> Kevin
Sierra will probably turn Return to Krondor into a BIA clone :-) (just
kidding).
Max C. Strini
In article <676flr$l1...@news1.alltel.net>,
"Vortex" <Mor...@Gawain.com> wrote:
>
> I bought a PSX just for FF7, and it was one of the greatest games I've ever
> played. I enjoyed myself throughout the story, and was awed by the
> fantastic FMV sequences. But now that I've finished it, I have absolutely
> no desire to go back and play it again. I played through it twice, and the
> second time, while not unpleasant, served only to refresh my memory and view
> the FMV's over again. The game is so completely linear that it has no
> replay value.
Well, that's not true. You can try going through the game using
different materia strategies/characters/fighting fewer monsters to make
it harder. I've played through the game twice and am already working on
my 3rd try; this time I want to beat it at level 40.
Max C. Strini
In article <349ca801...@news.uwaterloo.ca>,
iadm...@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca (Ian) wrote:
> Yes, in most Final Fantasy games (except, at least, the very first) you
> basically play NPCs - pregenerated characters. A big appeal of "real" RPGs
> is that they involve creating your own character. This is a big appeal. In
> Daggerfall, one of the big selling points was that you have a huge number of
> options in creating your own character, including special powers and totally
> custom classes.
<snip> In Final Fantasy III, all of your characters can change class
at ANY time (other than in battle, etc.) (you eventually acquire 20
different classes) and as they use a certain class, they'll gain job
experience points which increase their ability within that class as well
as general experience points. (Each class has different weapons/
abilities/stats) In Final Fantasy V, you still have free job-changing
ability (21 classes plus you can make your character classless), only
this time as you gain job levels, you'll learn more abilities/commands
for that job, (around 80 abilities in the game and you can equip one of
your learned abilities/commands (or two of them if you make your
character classless, or 3 if you make the character a mime, although then
he/she can't fight or use items) on the character even after you change
their class to something else. Some abilities and commands affect your
stats too. Plus if you get a job to the highest possible level you'll
have mastered that job and then you'll be able to use all its inherent
abilities and get all its stat bonuses when you make the character a mime
or classless, without having to equip them or use up a slot at all. In
Final Fantasy VII, your characters' abilities are determined by the
materia you equip on their weapons and armor. Each weapon or armor has a
certain number of slots for materia and also grows materia at different
rates (some weapons, such as the 'Ultimate Weapons' for each character,
don't grow materia at all) so there's always a tradeoff between whether
you want to give them more powerful weapons or armor or whether you want
to give them stuff with more room for materia. When you equip a materia
on someone, it gives them whatever abilities it's supposed to grant (i.e.
cure magic, summoning, stealing items, etc. - most materia give you more
abilities/become more powerful when you grow them to higher levels by
fighting with them equipped) plus it has certain effects on their stats.
For instance, Bahamut Zero is an extremely powerful attack spell, and the
materia that lets you use it gives you a +4 bonus to your magic power and
+15% to MP, but on the other hand it also gives -4 to attack and -10% to
HP. These bonuses/penalties aren't 'compounded' (i.e. if you equip both
Bahamut Zero and Neo Bahamut, which also takes your HP down by 10%, your
HP will be at 80% of its original value, not 81%) In this way, you can
position your characters anywhere on a continuum between fighters, mages,
healers, or whatever. Also some weapons and armor have linked slots and
in those linked slots you can combine a regular materia with special blue
materia that make the first one more effective in some way. For
instance, there are blue materia which combine with magic materia like
'fire' so that not only will it let you use fire magic, it will also make
you immune to fire magic. There are 80 kinds of materia in all. In
Final Fantasy Tactics the free job-change system from FF3 and 5 is back
only this time you have to get your characters up to certain levels in
the 'basic' jobs like Squire or Chemist before you can change them to
some of the more 'advanced' jobs like Mathematician and Dancer. To get
new abilities this time you have to spend JP which you get by using the
abilities you already have in that job. There are supposedly over 200
abilities. In some ways, these systems are better than 'character
creation' because they're more flexible.
Max C. Strini
>
> >>Comparing FF7 to Fallout is a joke. IMO, Fallout isn't that good at all.
> >>People are just hyping it because it's the first halfway decent RPG for the
> >>PC in quite some time. In terms of depth of story, and overall fun factor,
> >>FF7 is the best.
> >
> >
> >What Final Fantasy is lacking is a thing called good ole American ROLE
> >playing. The best American games have multiple paths, multiple ways of
> >doing things, and actually let the player change the world and possibly
> >alter the path of the game away from the main story line. (Such as the
> >billions of mini-quests in Wasteland, signing on with Blackthorne in Ultima
> >V.) Heck, even Diablo had multiple different characters you could play to
> >change the game.
>
> basically play NPCs - pregenerated characters. A big appeal of "real" RPGs
> is that they involve creating your own character. This is a big appeal. In
> Daggerfall, one of the big selling points was that you have a huge number of
> options in creating your own character, including special powers and totally
> create the "average" jack of all trades, unusually good at combat CRPG
> character and play through a decent game. Or, you can make a primarily
> diplomatic character, or a sneaky thief, or tactically astute sniper, and
> have a _very_ different game. One of Fallout's best points is that you can
> create your own characterm, with tremendous variety available, develop them
> as you wish, and you will actually have a VERY different game depending on
> what your character is like. You won't notice this if you play an "average"
> combat-oriented character and leave it at that, but a good diplomat can
> charm his way through almost anything (if you use your own brains too). You
> can play an evil bruiser type, and win the game by walking around killing
> literally anything that moves... or you can play a sneaky type, use your
> brain, and beat the game without so much as firing a single shot. Now THAT
> is something you will not find in any other CRPG.
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
jeffrey.powell
The reason i'd put Fallout over FF7 is challenge.
I'm about 2/3s of the way through ff7 and I've yet to lose a
battle or wonder "Hmmmmm, should I go here, or should I go there?"
Playing ff7 feels like watching scream2, fallout like being
in scream2 and trying to figure out how to avoid the killer.
Tradional computer rpgs and japanese rpgs are fundamentally
different genres. If you are a proponent of one, it wouldn't
matter how good a game from the other would be; it just wouldn't
be what you were really looking for in an "rpg".
While Wing Arms and Vandal Hearts aren't up to the technical
standards of FF7, I like both better because they
required more "brainwork". Matter of fact, add Suikoden to that list.
Call me crazy, but I haven't touched FF7 since I picked up
Ogre Battle.
--
---<--'@ j...@albany.net @`-->---
PsychoKick
It's a common but utter mistake to try to American CRPGs with Japanese
CRPGs. The true counterpart to the American CRPG is _not_ the Japanese CRPG,
but Japanese "life-sim" games such as Metal Angel, Graduation, Princess Maker,
Monster Rancher, etc etc. Though they vary widely in subject matter, the basic
premise and gameplay mechanics are the same as most American CRPGs: generate a
character(s) and build them up through different situations and strategies of
your own choosing. Japanese life-sim games just tend to cover a wider and odder
range of subjects than just sword&sorcery, which is why people tend not to
think of them in the same way as American CRPGs.
--
********PsychoKick******** "I have to dream big. I only have
*Mad Animator in Training* time to get half of it done."
*And Professional Slacker* -Solomon Short
************************** "A Season for Slaughter"
Justin A. Hussel, The High Toadlord
Aaron D. Thompson wrote:
>
> MCBad4Life wrote:
>
> >I agree no matter how you look at it Final Fanasy 7 doesn't compare >to
> Fallout, or any other Square RPG game. The graphics sold the >game and
> that's the bottom line.
>
> FF7 is unoriginal. How many of you have actually played the damn game all
> the way through? I have played a ton of RPGs, and FF7s plot is about the
> most original one I've seen. You call Fallout original? Post-holocaust
> post-holocaust mutant stuff is boring and it has been done before anyway. I
> prefer the "fantasy crap" myself, even though FF7 doesn't really take place
> in true "fantasy" (read: medieval/sword-and-sorcery type) setting.
Wow--I couldn't agree with you MORE!!! 8P (Actually, I haven't even
played FF7 yet--I'm getting it & a playstation for Xmas--but I love all
the FF games, and basically feel the same way as you apparently do about
Fallout! It's nice to hear/see/read someone giving Fallout something
other than praise!!! It's a nice game... But IMHO, it's by no means the
ultimate or best CRPG ever... I also prefer the 'fantasy crap' above all
else. ;)
...The High Toadlord
Justin A. Hussel
Max C. Strini
In article <01bd0572$0bfad340$45d4f20a@ntw_quattrof>,
"Fred Quattrone" <fr...@erols.com> wrote:
>
> The reason no one complains about it here is because this is a forum for PC
> games not PSX games. When it is finally released for PC, you will see the
> complaints. I personally do not think that this game will make it on the PC
> platform. There are too many things in this game that CPRG players do not
> like. The save game feature is terrible and there are many action and timed
> sequences.
Um...what is wrong with the save game feature? Would you rather not be
able to save your game? Or are you one of those strange people who
insists on being able to save at any time, because apparently you never
have the opportunity to play a game for more than thirty seconds at a
time?
-MARKETING-
Sudric
Justin save your money...FF7 is coming out for pC by Eidos..and it has to be
better than the pstation...
i've got a message called FF7 on this newsgroup..look at it..weve been
discussing it
Zweldron
>In article <01bd0572$0bfad340$45d4f20a@ntw_quattrof>,
> "Fred Quattrone" <fr...@erols.com> wrote:
>>
>> The reason no one complains about it here is because this is a forum for PC
>> games not PSX games. When it is finally released for PC, you will see the
>> complaints. I personally do not think that this game will make it on the PC
>> platform. There are too many things in this game that CPRG players do not
>> like. The save game feature is terrible and there are many action and timed
>> sequences.
Actually, I plan on getting FF7 for the PC as soon as it comes out. I enjoy
both the Japanese and Americal style RPGs (am I the only one? sometimes it
seems like that) Just don't ask me to compare them- such a comparison can't be
done; they are very different types of games.
As for the save game feature, I find nothing wrong with it. There should be
nothing wrong with having limited access to being able to save. this just makes
it so you have to be more careful in what you do.
---Matthew, The Qurqirish Dragon, <<UDIC>>
Alec
>Actually, I plan on getting FF7 for the PC as soon as it comes out. I enjoy
>both the Japanese and Americal style RPGs (am I the only one? sometimes it
>seems like that) Just don't ask me to compare them- such a comparison can't
be
>done; they are very different types of games.
>As for the save game feature, I find nothing wrong with it. There should be
>nothing wrong with having limited access to being able to save. this just
makes
>it so you have to be more careful in what you do.
no your not alone, I use my PC for American RPGs and my PSX, SNES for
Japanese RPGs, I don't think one is better then the other, they both have
strong points, you just have to be willing to accept that not all RPGs are
based off of pencil and paper games (which I normally play over any PC based
RPG if I want the real stuff)
Kemin
Complaining about Final Fantasy VII? I tried it for a few bits here and
there at a friend's place on his Play Station, and I like it a lot.
Perhaps I just haven't reached the stage that I know enough about it to
complain. I'm getting it for PC as soon as it comes out for sure! But
I wasn't aware of the limited saves feature, I guess that could be a
draw back. If anyone know more about the game please post any comments.
I would like to know more about what I'm buying into.
Pete K.
mega
Max C. Strini wrote:
> In article <01bd0572$0bfad340$45d4f20a@ntw_quattrof>,
> "Fred Quattrone" <fr...@erols.com> wrote:
> >
> > The reason no one complains about it here is because this is a forum for PC
> > games not PSX games. When it is finally released for PC, you will see the
> > complaints. I personally do not think that this game will make it on the PC
> > platform. There are too many things in this game that CPRG players do not
> > like. The save game feature is terrible and there are many action and timed
> > sequences.
>
> Um...what is wrong with the save game feature? Would you rather not be
> able to save your game? Or are you one of those strange people who
> insists on being able to save at any time, because apparently you never
> have the opportunity to play a game for more than thirty seconds at a
> time?
>
> -MARKETING-
>
> -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
Maybe he's just one of those people that would like the option to save a game
when they have to (need to leave, go to sleep, etc.) and in FF7 save spots can be
up to 20 minutes apart (early in the game). I have to agree that I don't think
FF7 will do all that well on the PC (at least I hope it doesn't, last thing we
need is a bunch of clones) I had FF7 for the psx and while the graphics were
incredible and the story interesting the game itself was not fun IMHO. The reason
I say this is because basically all FF7 is is an interactive storybook and not,
repeat NOT a true crpg. I played it about 25 hrs (no, I didn't finish it before I
traded it in) before I came to the point where I just couldn't play anymore
because of the boredom that was induced by reading/watching 25 minutes of story
then playing for 10 minutes then watching more FMV. Out of that 25 hrs I probably
only played 9hrs of actual game. If I wanted to read a book or watch a movie I'd
do just that. What I want in a crpg isn't that complicated or uncommon (I think).
Beyond obvious thinks like good story, etc. I want to at the very least effect my
environment/the story (ala fallout) and build up "my" characters. I do think the
storyline is well done in FF7 but its just to linear and has too many FMV scenes
and longwinded story scenes (which you don't affect at all) to be really
interesting to me. When I buy a game I want to play not watch.
mega
Sudric
>As for the save game feature, I find nothing wrong with it. There should be
>nothing wrong with having limited access to being able to save. this just
>makes
>it so you have to be more careful in what you do.
well i have not played long, but enjoy it...i beat FF2 (on snes) without
realizing you could save outside on teh map...I felt stupid for a while ( i
only saved on those tent sites. So saving in a few locales adds to the
challenge, and if you don't like a type of challenge, why play a rpg, or any
game for that matter
Alec
>I say this is because basically all FF7 is is an interactive storybook and
not,
>repeat NOT a true crpg. I played it about 25 hrs (no, I didn't finish it
before I
not, repeat NOT a true AMERICAN CRPG, unlike most Americans, some can grasp
the fact that there are different types of RPGs, if I wanted games with
awful storylines and lots of stats I would play a PC RPG, but I prefer
storyline, when I want to do stats I play a REAL RPG, in which I actually
get storyline and stats...FF VII is good in it's own right, if you've played
any other FF game you know what your getting, if not try FF VI on an
emulator and you'll know whether it's for you or not
Gunawan Agus
> While Wing Arms and Vandal Hearts aren't up to the technical
> standards of FF7, I like both better because they
> required more "brainwork". Matter of fact, add Suikoden to that list.
>
> Call me crazy, but I haven't touched FF7 since I picked up
> Ogre Battle.
> --
> ---<--'@ j...@albany.net @`-->---
Ogre battle is perhaps a console game that most resemble a PC game.
I've had much 'quality' fun time with Wild Arms and Ogre Battle even
though they are not up to FF7 technical standard. BTW, FF7 technical
standard is not really that great...it's the graphics (and allegedly,
the story line) that make the game. The 3D over 2D map is not really a
tremendous technical feat. The integration of FMV/CGI with 2D/3D
background is not one either. It's the graphics, whether it's 2D or 3D
that set a new standard.
wan
Gunawan Agus
Vortex wrote:
> Lastly, to those of you who are waiting for FF7 on the PC, it's
> going to be terrible, and here's why: ports are usually bad (not just
> poorly programmed, but the designers always seem to "cater" to American
> tastes by removing all the coolest parts; American PSX FF7 was very lucky
> in that the translators did not "gut" the product), this is Square's 1st PC
> game, and the programmers have been recruited off the street by ads in
> gaming mags.
I don't think FF7 for PC will be any different from PSX version. The
censorship that you mentioned was the way SNES games operates. Square
is a company proud of its products and I bet they'll try to preserve it
the best they can. However, I do hope they will redo the translation
for the PC part. Take off those ebonics, put more humor in those
dialogs, clarify or reword some sentences. Let those people who did the
translation for FF3 do it again, for gad's sake!!!
wan
Belial XX
>I don't think FF7 for PC will be any different from PSX version. The
>censorship that you mentioned was the way SNES games operates. Square
>is a company proud of its products and I bet they'll try to preserve it
>the best they can. However, I do hope they will redo the translation
>for the PC part.
Sorry but Eidos is the ones handling the game.Square most likely will have
nothing to do with the port.
>Take off those ebonics, put more humor in those dialogs,
I take it you haven't played the game because FF 7 has been critized for having
too much humor for this serious of a game.Also Barret is hick.He talks like a a
hick.If he's white and talks the same way,people wouldn't be saying it's
ebonics.
> Let those people who did the translation for FF3 do it again, for gad's
sake!!!
The same ones famous for compeltly censoring games?Removing entire scenes
because they aren't suitable for US audiances?I'd take Sony with their very
ocasional spelling error over those people.
Reuben Angel Rosa
Umm guys why are you all making so many mistakes and assuming a lot of shit! One
Eidos is just publishing the title. All that means is they handle the distribution
of the title thats it! They have no hand in the gameplay area or translations.
Square has been working on the translation FF7 for the pc for over 7 months. And
yes Square is actually working on this translation. They did hire new programmers
for the translation they didn't hire new game designers! And as for all those who
have been whining about the boring aspect of FF7 the only boring aspect of the game
is the entire first city. Once you leave the first city and go out to the world map
,then all hell breaks loose and the real game begins. I know of so many people who
after I told them to coninue on past the first city and did Thanked me . Cause then
they were hooked and didn't stop playing until they finished the game. And as for
the so called horrible save feature. Once you leave the city you can save anywhere
on the world map! So that gripe is just that a lame gripe. And Comparing Fallout
to Ff7 is apples to oranges both are totally different styles of rpgs but both are
load of fun. And in the end as long as I have fun and get absorbed in a game well
thats all I want! A solid 40 hours of gameplay is all i need. And uh I will get
the ff7 for the pc. Why ? Voodoo enhancement. There will be game graphics that will
have to be loaded on to the pc. So loading times will even be less of an issue. Now
how can they improve the already awesome game graphics. Well every 3d polygon
rendered shot can be improved with voodoo . Character graphics,animations, the
3dworld map graphics, The summoning spells graphics all can be voodoo enhanced and
look way superior to the Psx version. Imagine the entire game in high res! I make a
bet that Square add some little extras into the pc version. Remember they are
getting paid mad dough to do this! Ff7 for pc was announced when windows95 had been
out only for 3 months. Bill Gates spent mad dough to get what he said was the
greatest game to His platform. So Square will have the funds to make a real good
port. Trust me guys you will be surprised. I gotta feeling in my bones about this.
Christmas Joe
It was with a bemused expression on my face that on 22 Dec 1997
07:50:33 GMT, I read beli...@aol.com (Belial XX) write:
>>I don't think FF7 for PC will be any different from PSX version. The
>>censorship that you mentioned was the way SNES games operates. Square
>>is a company proud of its products and I bet they'll try to preserve it
>>the best they can. However, I do hope they will redo the translation
>>for the PC part.
>
>Sorry but Eidos is the ones handling the game.Square most likely will have
>nothing to do with the port.
Picking a nit, but Eidios is only publishing it. Square is doing the
port themselves, from their LA location.
Joe
Ben Flieger
Alec wrote in message <67gqka$3...@suriname.earthlink.net>...
Well, considering that FF3 blows on every emulator I have tried, you may
want to wait for the supposed FF5/6 port due out early in '98. But to get
the gist of the series, play FF1 on Nesticle. A superb emulator that has
tons of features and runs like a charm(unlike the astounding slowness of
many SNES emus). Note, I am not endorsing or condoning illegal activity. All
of those found with illegal ROMs should be thrown in with the people who rip
tags of mattresses.
>
>
Belial XX
>All that means is they handle the distribution of the title thats it! They
the translation FF7 >for the pc for over 7 months.And yes Square is actually
working on this translation. >They did hire new programmers for the translation
they didn't hire new game >designers!
Those new programmers are not from Square.I was wrong about them being Eidos
but Square themselves will not do the actual porting..Square is too busy with
their ton of other projects they are making to deal with a PC port.That is why
they were looking for outside programmers.
>And uh I will get
>the ff7 for the pc. Why ? Voodoo enhancement. There will be game graphics
>that will
>have to be loaded on to the pc. So loading times will even be less of an
>issue. Now
>how can they improve the already awesome game graphics. Well every 3d polygon
>rendered shot can be improved with voodoo . Character graphics,animations,
>the
>3dworld map graphics, The summoning spells graphics all can be voodoo
>enhanced and
>look way superior to the Psx version. Imagine the entire game in high res! I
>make a
>bet that Square add some little extras into the pc version. Remember they are
>getting paid mad dough to do this! Ff7 for pc was announced when windows95
>had been
>out only for 3 months. Bill Gates spent mad dough to get what he said was the
>greatest game to His platform. So Square will have the funds to make a real
>good
>port. Trust me guys you will be surprised. I gotta feeling in my bones about
>this.
You are going to spend an extra 50 bucks,just so the graphics look a little
nicer and the special effects are better?Suit yourself.Also,by the time FF 7
comes out for the PC, FF 8 will be out,most likely and that will probably blow
away FF 7 for PC.Take a look at Xenogears for the PSX.Those are the best
graphics I have ever seen by far and that game is coming out in January.Imagine
how much better FF 8 will look,when it comes out a year later.
Justin A. Hussel, The High Toadlord
Thanks, but beleive me--I know all about the FF7 PC thing, but
regardless: it's too late--and I'm not spending my money anyway, it's a
Xmas present... There are actually more reasons involved for getting a
Playstation...
But even without those other reasons, I simply can't wait another half a
year (probably longer) for FF7--this is the first FF game that I haven't
been able to buy IMEADIATELY after its release... Just 2 more days, and
I'll have a PSX & FF7... 8)
Justin A. Hussel, The High Toadlord
mega wrote:
>
> Max C. Strini wrote:
>
> > In article <01bd0572$0bfad340$45d4f20a@ntw_quattrof>,
> > "Fred Quattrone" <fr...@erols.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > The reason no one complains about it here is because this is a forum for PC
> > > games not PSX games. When it is finally released for PC, you will see the
> > > complaints. I personally do not think that this game will make it on the PC
> > > platform. There are too many things in this game that CPRG players do not
> > > like. The save game feature is terrible and there are many action and timed
> > > sequences.
> >
> > Um...what is wrong with the save game feature? Would you rather not be
> > able to save your game? Or are you one of those strange people who
> > insists on being able to save at any time, because apparently you never
> > have the opportunity to play a game for more than thirty seconds at a
> > time?
> >
> > -MARKETING-
> >
> > -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
> > http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
>
> Maybe he's just one of those people that would like the option to save a game
> when they have to (need to leave, go to sleep, etc.) and in FF7 save spots can be
> up to 20 minutes apart (early in the game). I have to agree that I don't think
> FF7 will do all that well on the PC (at least I hope it doesn't, last thing we
> need is a bunch of clones)
Hell, I'd LOVE to see some FF7--or any other FF--clones on the PC!!
It's gett'n to the point where they're the only kind of games that I
really enjoy & that can really hold my interest... Legacy of Kain's the
first PC game I've genuinely enjoyed & finished (just finished it
tonight 8) ) in a LONG time!