/vr/ - Retro Games

[Anonymous No.3261434]

This is supposed to be an RPG classic?
It's really really bad!
So much for old RPGs I guess.

[Anonymous No.3261446]

Bad bait. I just finished the PS version. It was awesome. I'm enjoying FFV much more, though.

[Anonymous No.3261450]

>>3261434
It was revolutionary as fuck when it came out, but it's ultimately an average and heavily broken game. Play the PSX version, it's much more polished. If you prefer MP to vancian magic, play the GBA or PSP remakes, but do note that the presence of MP greatly diminishes the game's difficulty.

[Anonymous No.3261451]

>>3261434
It's a great game.

Just inferior to (most of) its successors.

[Anonymous No.3261454]

>>3261450
>It was revolutionary as fuck when it came out
How so?

[Anonymous No.3261460]

>>3261434
>Final Fantasy
>first one in never-ending series

[Anonymous No.3261485]

>>3261454
A full party fighting against up to nine monsters at once with each entity visible on-screen was a big deal back then, as was the presence of an actual plot, top-down dungeons, and being on a console to boot. It also used the vancian magic system from Dungeons & Dragons which was also a big deal and possibly seen as more "advanced" than what Dragon Quest had.

To speak of Dragon Quest, that game had one playable character, all fights were one-on-one, and the character wasn't visible in battle. Final Fantasy was a huge step-up in the visual aspects.

There was also the simple fact that instead of "Open", "Look", "Search", "Talk", and the rest of the menu-based interactions that plagued older games there was a simple "press this button and context takes over" which was a pretty massive improvement as well.

[Anonymous No.3261526]

>>3261460
>NeverEnding Story
>The story ends

[Anonymous No.3261532]

>>3261460
It was because the company was going to close and they were making one last game it was successful and they didn't close.

[Anonymous No.3261536]

>>3261434
Not bad. Turn your battle speed up and problem solved.

[Anonymous No.3261592]

>>3261485
>To speak of Dragon Quest, that game had one playable character, all fights were one-on-one
Eh DQ2 had a party of characters and multiple groups of enemies and came out 11 months before FF1.

[Anonymous No.3261596]

A genre-defying game when it came out. it's just that it's among one of the worst-aged games ever now.

[Anonymous No.3261609]

>>3261596
But it hasn't. It's still satisfying as fuck to play through. I'm actually playing through Dragon Quest for the first time right now, and it just plays so bad. If it wasn't for save states, it would be full on retarded. Really, I have to backtrack to one character every time I want to save? I'm standing on a chest, and there is anything I would want to do but open it? Standing on stairs? what do you think I want to do there? The torch is pathetic. I don't even mind limited vision, but 1 square? are you kidding me? How does this enhance the game? And I'm an old school RPG fan. I still have all of the graph paper maps I made in Might and Magic 1. I just never expect this kind of bullshit in a console game. We'd advanced beyond that by this point. Show me the damned map, and if you want to be clever, put in some traps amd hidden passages.

[Anonymous No.3261871]

Did we really need this thread again

[Anonymous No.3261893]

>>3261434
>It's really really bad!

you just have really really shitty taste

[Anonymous No.3262086]

>>3261609
You could want to check you inventory to make sure it wasn't full before you look in the chest. The menu is pretty useful at times. Also this is the first Dragon Quest game which was pretty much the first Console RPG.

It's totally sensible to backtrack to one character because the game was not meant to be played all in one go, which would confuse an American audience used to renting but not a Japanese audience which was fine with saving (or a password system in their case, the game was released there before save batteries in cartridges were a thing!)

Play the game more segmented, try to make repeated attempts through dungeons while managing resources more, be clever with your magic and attacks, do more than just ATTACK/HEAL because in Dragon Quest the spells actually do everything they're supposed to and they are all useful unlike in Final Fantasy.

I agree that FFI is still great though, it's pretty much a generic AD&D game from Japan but I love AD&D so I'm totally fine with that.

[Anonymous No.3262378]

>>3261485
Dragon Quest wasn't the only RPG at the time.
Ultima 3 had tactical combat and came out on the Famicom months before FF1.
Wizardry had vancian magic though I'm not sure when in 87 the FC port got released, but likely before FF1 as well.

[Anonymous No.3262586]

>>3262378
How are the console Utlima games?

[Anonymous No.3262628]

>>3262586
3 on NES is alright, 4 on the SMS is great, 6 on SNES is alright. UW1 on PS1 is alright.
4 and 5 on NES are crap, 7 and SE on SNES are a joke.

[Anonymous No.3262672]

>>3261434
You're a fucking retard. It's the best game in the series. And I'm talking about the NES version.

[Anonymous No.3262729]

>>3262672
>It's the best game in the series
How can you possibly justify saying something like that?

[Anonymous No.3262735]

>>3262672
1 is good, but 2 is better. I mean, they are of course differents, the first plays like a roguelike done in japan, while the second, with its story, introduces the elements that would make FF as we know it today.

[Anonymous No.3262756]

Im torn on whether FFV or FFVI was my favorite
I know the common consensus is FFVI but I really enjoyed V a lot.

Have a friend who shits all over VI because you start the game in mecha suits and for some reason he wont believe me that the mecha suits are only in the very beginning of the game. Its a shame he wont give it another shot, he's convinced IV is the best in the series.

[Anonymous No.3262775]

>>3262628
What's the difference between "crap" and "a joke"? Which one is better?

[Anonymous No.3262780]

>>3262756
I back up that claim, IV is better (at least than V). I think VI is too linear, but you can't argue it improves in almost every aspect the FF saga. But from the story point of view, FF peaked with IV

Also, dat OST https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJgHyOmMw8k&index=38&list=PL1E168E0B66861FC0

[Anonymous No.3262796]

I'd rather play II over I tbqh

[Anonymous No.3262865]

>>3261532
Did you also know that the Super Mario 2 we got wasn't the ACTUAL Super Mario 2 but was actually a game called Doki Doki Panic???

[Anonymous No.3262875]

>>3261434
RPGs are basically all shallow and repetitive

[Anonymous No.3263134]

>>3262775
4 is extremely dumbed down in comparison to the SMS or computer versions.
5 tried to copy the style of 6 which was beyond the NES's capabilities and it runs like complete ass.
7 can hardly be considered the same game. Instead of a party based adventure RPG you get a action game with similar assets. NoA also censored the hell out of it so even the plot ends up differently.
SE is similar but it was only released in Japan.

[Anonymous No.3263849]

>>3261434
Unless this is bait, some old games aren't very fun to play if you're used to things that offer a more convenient experience.

Are you a fan of any of the later FF games? Did you play those first? If so I can hardly blame you for not getting into FF1.

If you would like to give the game another chance, it has quite a few remakes on other systems with balance tweaks and new content. You might find one to your liking.

[Anonymous No.3263901]

>>3261450
>It was revolutionary as fuck when it came ou

I keep hearing people say this but it's never backed up. Is there a single thing FF did that Western Rpgs hadn't been doing years earlier on the PC?

I think this is just a case of console kiddie syndrome, short of like how people think Goldeneye is relevent in gaming history.
>>3261596
How is a wizardry knock-off genre defining? ff1 has more in common with old western rpgs than japanese rpgs, it even uses spells per day.

[Anonymous No.3263909]

>>3263901
>Is there a single thing FF did that Western Rpgs hadn't been doing years earlier on the PC?
Money.

[Anonymous No.3263931]

>>3262756
>>3262780
5 is easily the best 2D Final Fantasy because jobs. 7 is best 3D because freshness/sincerity and 12 is best modern

[Anonymous No.3263967]

>>3262865

[Anonymous No.3263968]

I like how Western the first two games are. The sequels were and are way to weebish for my taste.

[Anonymous No.3263982]

>>3263909
How were Gil remarkable outside of the odd name?

[Anonymous No.3264124]

>>3263968
3rd one is pretty western too.

[Anonymous No.3264137]

>>3262780
>I think VI is too linear
Only until you get to the world of ruin, then it's literally Sidequests: The Game.

[Anonymous No.3264261]

>>3263968
>The sequels were and are way to weebish for my taste.
That's because Kawazu lost interest and fucked off to make SaGa so he could make whatever he wanted instead of being forced to make a game popular and lowering the quality bar.

[Anonymous No.3264301]

>>3262780
>Also, dat OST

Hit me right in the feels. Can't even bear to listen.

[Anonymous No.3264317]

>>3264137
>then it's literally Sidequests: The Game.
Pssh, ever play X-2?

[Anonymous No.3265248]

>>3264261
Is SaGa any good? I was thinking of playing Romancing SaGa on SNES since I like the sound of the open-endedness of it but I haven't heard very good things.

[Anonymous No.3265258]

>>3261434
It's pretty solid. Much better than the anime garbage that comes out of the genre now.

[Anonymous No.3265369]

>>3261434
It's well known because some of the sequels are good if you like JRPGs.

[Anonymous No.3265383]

>>3265248
Confusing as fuck, but pretty enjoyable once you know what you're doing.

[Anonymous No.3265484]

>>3265248
minstrel song is the best SaGa game imo
if you can get over the voice acting and artstyle, you're going to like it

[Anonymous No.3265490]

>>3262756
>>3263931
V is definitely the most fun game.

[Anonymous No.3265570]

>>3263931
But anon, FF is not only battles. It is true that it constitutes the 50% of it, but story is what you remember once you finish the game.
>>3264137
Yeah, maybe linear is not the word. Old FF puts some energy into making you feel you are inside a big world, whereas more than half of VI looks like you have almost no freedom, just keep moving forward. The map makes you feel like that.
On the other hand, world of ruin happens almost at the end. However i always loved these alternative worlds, like in LttP or SotN

[Anonymous No.3265625]

>>3265248
Start with Romancing SaGa 3 or the PS2 remake of 1 since the original game lacks the skill mechanic that makes the RS games good.

[Anonymous No.3265632]

>>3262780
>but you can't argue it improves in almost every aspect the FF saga
I can and will argue this. It's the game that killed any form of non-optional difficulty for the FF series from thereon out, it had balance issues that were as large and as ubiquitous as FFII's, and the mechanical improvements it made either didn't matter because they had no real impact on the game, like different methods of input for commands like Blitz or SwdTech, or were barely noticeable, like AI improvements that might as well have not existed because the game didn't take advantage of them the way games like FFIV or V would have. Gameplay-wise it's such a massive step down from V that I have no love for it, and the worst part of it is that it made this kind of carelessness the standard for FF.

[Anonymous No.3265645]

>>3265632
When one compares a game and its predecesors, one has observe if, overall, the game improved or not, and picking on individual subjects doesn't make justice to the general observation.

What is FF, a combat simulator? Its short-term gimmick is combat, i agree, but nowdays FF is well known for the relationships among the characters and how they are developed over the game. Combat only servers as medium to obtain these story moments. Maybe you cared because you lost the freedom V gave you, an aspect which was not that important and explains why nowdays people have more sympathy for VI than for V.

In fact, the only aspect remarkable for V was it jobs system. But again, FF is a rpg, not a combat simulator. You may argue that, in fact, combat in rpgs are always the same (for 90% of them, press A and continue walking) because only a few of them are important/hard enough to make you care.

[Anonymous No.3265646]

>>3265570
See but FFV had a good story. Not the best in the series but I feel people give it too much heat. It was a little generic but I still felt it was a pretty good story.

[Anonymous No.3265659]

>>3265645
>When one compares a game and its predecesors, one has observe if, overall, the game improved or not
And I honestly can't say that it did. It's lazy, sloppy bullshit whose long-term contributions to the series ensured that FF went down a road that made it impossible for me to enjoy them even a quarter as much as I did FFI, let alone games that were better than it like IV or V.

[Anonymous No.3265662]

>>3265659
I prefer IV, but given how popular FF is nowdays, i cannot look at VI as the natural evolution for the series.

I has the appeal that it makes you feel there is a big world waitting for you to discover its secrets, every quest is a new adventure that makes you wonder how will you complete it. The world was well designed, it gives you a small room and, little by little, you get more space thanks to vehicles. 1 shares a lot with DQ in this regard.
IV was a good compromise between your typical rpg world and character story driven. What i like about IV is that it has good inter-character interaction without giving up the story. It feels like your fantastic medieval story, with travels to the secret monster town, the land of wizard where everyone hates you for what you did, the talented blacksmith that will make you a better sword as long as you bring the required material.

[Anonymous No.3265664]

>>3265632
ffvi was the first atb ff that let you skip turns, so yout healer didn't need to waste his turn on defending
it would've been nice if the game was more challenging, but I find most atb ffs decent with the fastest speed in active mode
never liked world of ruin tho, always lose motivation to play the game there
I even managed to finish the supposedly "unplayable" FFII but not VI

[Anonymous No.3265671]

>>3265662
>i cannot look at VI as the natural evolution for the series.
Exactly, that's why I'm so fucking annoyed with it. FFII-V all felt like they built on their predecessors. FFVI and onward feel like a completely different series that uses FF trappings, with FFIX being one of the only games that bothered to look back and it managed to fuck everything up really badly.

This isn't coincidence, either, because FFV was the last game that Sakaguchi acted as producer on.

[Anonymous No.3265763]

Where were you when you found out White Wizard was not a badass red haired Nordic priest of Thor, but in fact a woman?

[Anonymous No.3265771]

>le revolutionary game

>DQ1 and 2 were out when this was made, and 3 just around the corner

Just play the superior jRPG series, anon.

[Anonymous No.3265778]

Which version should I play if I've never played FFI? Advance or NES

[Anonymous No.3265779]

>>3265771
>whynotboth.jpg

[Anonymous No.3265781]

JRPG in general are terrible because they basically miss the whole point of role playing. Japan's first widespread contact with RPG was Wizardry, a very terse dungeon crawler.

So for a number of years RPG in Japan = a gazillion random encounters, linearity and stats for the sake of them and not as a mean for world simulation.

[Anonymous No.3265783]

>>3265778
PSP

But Advance and original are both fine too.

[Anonymous No.3265797]

>>3265778
GBA version is casualized garbage, play PS1 compilation with disabled auto attacks.

[Anonymous No.3265803]

>>3265779
>>3265771

This essentially, video game tribalism needs to die

[Anonymous No.3265805]

>>3265781
FF1 isn't that similar to Wizardry, the connections to D&D are far more blatant.

[Anonymous No.3265808]

>>3265781
What is the point of role playing, exactly? RPGs were about stats and leveling for most of their history, only post-Fallout CRPGs put freedom and character choice in the front, and then they often completely fucked up the combat.

[Anonymous No.3265815]

>>3265808
Having fun.

[Anonymous No.3265816]

>>3261434
>I don't understand whit's popular! It's BAD!!!

FFI is more or less a light RPG that's focused more on being a challenge to overcome, rather than a modern WRPG, which is an entirely different genre.

Modern WRPGs are all about total control and customization. open world and all that other chis.
FFI is about leveling up and buying new equips for your team until you can go face the next boss like 12-15 times.

Where's the basis of comparison? It's like comparing Rayman 2 to The original Mario Brothers (the arcade one) and saying Mario is bad, because it's not 3D. It's a retarded argument.

[Anonymous No.3265819]

>>3265808
With early RPGs, I just enjoy the story and the exp/gold grind. It's just chill for me. It's the huge nerd equivalent of playing solitaire to pass teh time.

[Anonymous No.3265825]

>>3265819
What early RPG had a notable story?

[Anonymous No.3265837]

>>3265781
but WRPGs are about as exciting as doing the groceries
just a checklist of fetchquests with a wafer thin plot
>b-but you can do them i-in any order you l-like
not impressed

[Anonymous No.3265838]

>>3265825
I actually like FF1's story.
Ultima was good as well.

My favorite is probably Might and Magic. it turns out you're on a space ship. It sets the scene for the next several games, and is referenced in future games. just a cool sci-fi twist to a fantasy setting.

[Anonymous No.3265878]

I have never gotten past Elfland for fucks sake
Also OP is a cunt this is some good low key grinding and RP. Nothing super fancy with wicked graphics or super advanced AI. Just good ol' RNG, questing, and being a hero.

[Anonymous No.3265924]

>>3265878
Who wants to be a hero?

[Anonymous No.3265936]

>>3265763
what? How autistic are you? I literally never thought the white mage/wizard was anything other than female, and I started playing the game around the age of 8

[Anonymous No.3265954]

>>3265924
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WI0mSEzttx8

[Anonymous No.3266020]

>>3265936
Not him, but I always thought it was a dude. I mean, look at that posture and jaw.

[Anonymous No.3266113]

>>3265781
>JRPG in general are terrible because they basically miss the whole point of role playing.

[Anonymous No.3266208]

>>3265825
Ultima IV https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Ultima_IV:_Quest_of_the_Avatar#/Plot

> The game follows the protagonist's struggle to understand and exercise the Eight Virtues.[4] After proving his or her understanding in each of the virtues, locating several artifacts and finally descending into the dungeon called the Stygian Abyss to gain access to the Codex of Ultimate Wisdom, the protagonist becomes an Avatar.

[Anonymous No.3266216]

>>3266208
The entire plot is

>collect the 8 macguffins

I mean, lots of RPGs have the same base plot but they have plenty of stuff around it.

[Anonymous No.3266229]

>>3266216
Ok, that wikipedia article does not resemble reality http://www.filfre.net/2014/07/ultima-iv/

[Anonymous No.3266263]

>>3266216
Collecting the stones, runes etc is basically filler. The main deal is embracing the virtues. The boss you have to defeat isn't an evil wizard but yourself.
It's a rather personal game that had many sequels and left a tremendous mark but there's nothing quite like it.

[Anonymous No.3266265]

>>3266263
I do like the fact that the game isn't about becoming super strong but is just about becoming the best human that you can be.

It's a shame the game itself is excruciating to play.

[Anonymous No.3266349]

>>3263901
It did it on a console. I remember when it came out. My friend's sister bought it and we played it to death. Not every house had a pc back then and even then the people I knew who had one didn't let their kids play with it because they used it for work. So it was revolutionary becayse it brought rpgs to living rooms and consoles have always been a better market.

[Anonymous No.3266351]

>>3266263
Sounds pretty shit to be honest. Where's the meaningful character interaction and the romantic subplots? It is impossible to have a good plot in a game where the main character is a blank slate (same goes for the first Final Fantasy)

[Anonymous No.3266367]

>>3266349
>So it was revolutionary because it brought rpgs to living rooms and consoles have always been a better market.
Maybe if you restrict it to the NES and North America, because otherwise you have to account for games like Phantasy Star 1.

[Anonymous No.3266394]

>>3266351
>romantic subplots
Weaboo detected

[Anonymous No.3266416]

>tfw final fantasy will never have a scenario where you save the dragon from the princess

[Anonymous No.3266828]

>>3261532

Wrong.

[Anonymous No.3266856]

>>3265671

>FF IV
>building on its predecessors

It actually disregarded pretty much everything from its predecessors and became a much worse game in the process.

[Anonymous No.3266865]

>>3266416
Someone forgot the stage play in FF7, I see.

[Anonymous No.3266985]

Anyway to know if an enemy has Blue Magic in FFV? Or do I need to really search it out or just use a guide?

[Anonymous No.3267068]

>>3266985
Any time an enemy casts a spell that isn't a regular spell you already are familiar with, there's a pretty good chance it's blue magic in FF5. 6 is when determining what's blue magic and what's just a normal enemy skill is when shit got bonkers.

[Anonymous No.3267193]

>>3265763
I never thought any of them were female when I played. Still don't.

I always thought that white mage is female meme started with 8-bit theater or whatever.

[Anonymous No.3267236]

>>3263982
I think he's talking about the game's financial success.

[Anonymous No.3267238]

>>3267193
they made the sprite more feminine in the later ports

[Anonymous No.3267360]

>>3265763
>badass
>priest of Thor

How is it possible to be "badass" while worshiping a dead god?

[Anonymous No.3267373]

>>3267360
Does anyone worship live gods?

[Anonymous No.3267406]

>>3267360
Jesus is the dead god, mate.

[Anonymous No.3267408]

>a game that plays pretty much like any other fucking JRPG
>"so much for old RPGs"
You fucking dumb kid. Go play Ultima, Wizardry, Eye of the Beholder, the Gold Box games...

THOSE are RPGs. Not this fucking linear JRPG crapfests.

[Anonymous No.3267420]

>>3267406
Jesus isn't a god.

[Anonymous No.3267430]

>>3267420
>(tips fedora)

[Anonymous No.3267431]

>>3267420
You're right. I mean, he listens to your prayers, grants wishes, is the right hand of the creator of the universe, came back from death, has traveled to hell and back, and is worshiped across the world, but he's totally not a god. He's completely different from all those other gods that have been worshiped throughout human history, somehow.

[Anonymous No.3267445]

>>3267431
>is the right hand of the creator of the universe
>He's completely different from all those other gods that have been worshiped throughout human history, somehow.

Avatars aren't gods. Gods are gods, avatars/prophets/progeny are merely divine. Also Jesus doesn't do anything miraculous without God working through him - he doesn't listen to your prayers or grant wishes and his resurrection was the work of God, not of himself.

[Anonymous No.3267459]

>>3267445
Potato potato. Avatars are Hindu incarnations of gods.

[Anonymous No.3267489]

>>3267430
He's right though. Jesus isn't God, but a prophet.

[Anonymous No.3267524]

>>3267489
You're implying there's only one god.

[Anonymous No.3267526]

>>3267524
There IS only one God, and Muhammad is his greatest prophet.

[Anonymous No.3267652]

>>3267526
We are ALL the manifestations of God, experiencing itself subjectively.

[Anonymous No.3267764]

>>3267526
...and like Muhammad himself, we should all go around killing whoever holds a different mentality from us and have intercourse with prepubescent girls. Oh yeah, brother.

[Anonymous No.3267771]

>>3267652
but what if God was originally retconned into existence by the collective dream of the humanity which he created

time isn't linear or anything

[Anonymous No.3267774]

>>3267489
Jesus isn't a prophet, he's an avatar

[Anonymous No.3267775]

>>3267764
like the spanish inquisition and priests buggering alter boys?

[Anonymous No.3267781]

>>3267771
It all went mad in a day.

[Anonymous No.3267786]

>>3267526
What kind of god chooses a mass murdering warlord to be his prophet?

[Anonymous No.3267796]

>>3267786
Given the history of mankind, I'd say the kind of god that alows that kind of history of mankind.

[Anonymous No.3267801]

>>3261460
The way I understand it, the translation was slightly off. Yes, they named the game "Final" because they assumed they were going out of business, but I don't think they wanted a term that just meant "Last". I think they actually wanted a title which meant "Greatest adventure of all time." I think what they were really going for more accurately translates to "Ultimate Fantasy", ultimate meaning terminal, but also greatest.

[Anonymous No.3267945]

>>3267775
Fuck off Muslim sympathizer.

[Anonymous No.3267951]

Fuck off McCarthy.

[Anonymous No.3268017]

>>3267445
Jesus is one of the holy trinity - the father, the son, and the holy spirit. He is as much a God as his father is.

[Anonymous No.3268052]

nicely cleaned

[Anonymous No.3268091]

>>3265570
>It is true that it constitutes the 50% of it
100% of the gameplay

[Anonymous No.3268095]

>>3267801
at the end of the day you responded to a meme shitter

[Anonymous No.3268105]

>>3263901
I think one thing that made FFI very remarkable is that it's very easy to play for being a relatively complex game, it's more complex than Dragon Quest, but still very accessible, even more if you count that you don't use clunky menu for interaction, but you can search/talk etc. with a single button press. Plus, it actually has a rather compelling storytelling, and as a kicker, the final plot twist is well done, and the ending is memorable even if similar endings have been done to death after that. You can say it takes things from many other games, like the battle system is similar to Dragon Quest, spells are directly from western rpg tradition, the flexible party can be seen in games like Wizardry, but it also has its own quirks like the world map composition, or the use of the airship (which is kinda fun to use and something I think was never seen before). It also was rather long game with a variety of enemies. Heck, even a secret rare enemy stronger than the bosses.

All in all, I think that the most groundbreaking thing was the overall execution.

[Anonymous No.3268108]

>>3268105
>the overall execution
if only. They have not executed the game. These fuckers actually released it. The beginning of the cinematic end

[Anonymous No.3268237]

>>3268105
>airship (which is kinda fun to use and something I think was never seen before)
I'm not sure about actual airships but aerial transport was a staple in Ultima with 1 having a flying car, 2 an airplane and rockets, 4 a balloon and 5 a flying carpet.

>the flexible party can be seen in games like Wizardry,
FF1 isn't that flexible. Once you start you have no way to change your members.

[Anonymous No.3270994]

>>3266020
It IS a dude. They made him a female in remakes but that 8-bit cutter right there is a manly hammer wielding cleric of buttkick.

[Anonymous No.3271001]

>>3268091
Nope

[Anonymous No.3271863]

>>3270994
>It IS a dude
Prove it. I think it's pretty obvious that it's a fair redheaded maiden.

[Anonymous No.3271896]

>>3271863
Hey man, if you dig chicks with thick hairy unibrows that's fine.

[Anonymous No.3272262]

>>3271863
The us manual for ff1 has screenshots where the white mage is called TONY.

[Anonymous No.3272394]

>>3271896
it's clearly supposed to be furrowed brows
>>3272262
>US manual
lol

[Anonymous No.3272730]

Never played Dragon Quest, but FF1-FF3 are seriously bad games

Like shockingly bad.

[Anonymous No.3272749]

>>3272730
Go on. Count to us the ways.

[Anonymous No.3272873]

>>3272394
>clearly
Time to get your eyes checked boy.

[Anonymous No.3272875]

>>3272730
FF1 is just dated. It was fine for what it was back then.
FF2 has legit flaws with it's system.

[Anonymous No.3273561]

>>3272394
Well, I can't find scans of the Famicom manual anywhere, and even if I could there's no guarantee that there'd even be a white mage in the screenshots, but lots of Famicom screenshots on Google images show that Japanese players gave the white mage masculine names, like Yuusuke, Michael, etc. Obviously that's not exactly conclusive evidence, but based on the fact that the us manual calls them Tony, Japanese players gave them masculine names, and his post-promotion sprite looks manly as fuck (admittedly the original sprite could easily be either), I'm inclined to think the white mage was originally male and later changed to female in remakes due to RPG healers usually being female.

[Anonymous No.3273620]

>>3265625
Sparking didn't make SaGa good, it is the experimentation of mechanics of what a RPG can be.

Though I would agree that it would be better to play the PS2 remake over the SNES original.

[Anonymous No.3273628]

>>3272875
Expand on how Final Fantasy I is fine while Final Fantasy II is flawed mechanically.

[Anonymous No.3273767]

>>3272875
>FF2 has legit flaws with it's system.
FFII has no more flaws than any other FF, if anything it is the one that's actually closest to what RPGs should be in terms of roleplaying when it comes to battle mechanics and stats, it predated TES by years on that.

[Anonymous No.3273786]

>>3265645
>Maybe you cared because you lost the freedom V gave you, an aspect which was not that important and explains why nowdays people have more sympathy for VI than for V.

That's probably because V was initially release only in Japan, anon, so it got way less exposure to Western audiences then VI did. Just throwing that out there

[Anonymous No.3273983]

>enemies attack first
>select all 4 of my character's commands at once even though 2 of them are useless
>enemies attack again before I cam even do anything
>both fighters miss
>enemy gets critical, kills white mage
>can't escape
>can't escape
>can't escape
>all characters miss again
>turn off game

[Anonymous No.3274017]

>>3273983
>waah it's too hard

[Anonymous No.3274037]

>>3274017
>rolling a dice is hard

[Anonymous No.3274383]

>>3273620
I disagree, the SaGa skill system is by far the best part of the series.

[Anonymous No.3274389]

>>3273786
I'd bet money that V would outright be the better received game the way it is in Japan if it was released in the West first.

[Anonymous No.3274564]

>>3273983
>Implying any of that is true

Trying too hard famicom.

[Anonymous No.3274942]

>>3262729
Simply. FF is a shit series. This one is just specifically because it isn't like FF. Stories are gay. Predefined characters are even gayer.

[Anonymous No.3274994]

>>3274037
Seems plenty hard for you, apparently.

[Anonymous No.3275580]

Final Fantasy 5 will always be my favourite FF game.

FF1, FF4 and FF9 are my other favourites.

[Anonymous No.3276236]

>>3272394
>it's clearly supposed to be furrowed brows
A masculine facial expression if I ever saw one. It was the 80's, women weren't allowed to be determined, if the charcter was a chick she'd be all like 'Eek, monsters! Save me superior males!' That's right m8, can't contest that!

>>3273561
>I'm inclined to think the white mage was originally male and later changed to female in remakes due to RPG healers usually being female.
In all seriousness this is pretty close to how I think it went down too. I'd say it was for the sake of 'diversity', though. I mean they made one of the onion kids a girl with the FF3 reimagining for the same reason. But the real FF1 and 3 were all man all the time.

[Anonymous No.3276705]

>>3264124
Third is my favourite NES FF game. Also the least buggy.

[Anonymous No.3276707]

>>3275580
I don't get why people like so much FF V. I get the job system was a good point, but still.

[Anonymous No.3276801]

>>3261434
>old games suck
Why are you even here?
Fuck off back to /v/.

[Anonymous No.3276805]

>>3276801
posts like yours make me sad, because they strongly imply that yes, these games are bad, and people on /vr/ just are "mature enough" to tolerate the badness or see through it.
Thing is, these old games are not bad, or at least not any more or less bad than what's going on today. What OP is saying is ageless. They found the game to be very lackluster. At this point you can actually spend some time, think about what the game might do wrong, or right, actually evaluate the game on its merits, or you can put on your rose colored glasses and dismiss anybody who's saying something negative about a game as too young to understand.

[Anonymous No.3276830]

>>3276805
Except OP did not point out any reason for why it's supposedly bad.
Threads like this that basically just say "This old game is bad because it's old" serve no purpose. Especially not an a board specifically for old games.

You have to evaluate a game with the time it was released in mind.

Of course it feels lackluster compared to games that came years after it, improved on it and had more budget, time and people working on them.

And yes, you indeed have to be mature enough to see past it's shortcomings, which are just a product of it's time.

So stop trying to defend this pathetic excuse of a thread which just result in endless circlejerk which keep dragging this board down.

[Anonymous No.3276854]

>>3276830
>Except OP did not point out any reason for why it's supposedly bad.
know what happens to threads where OP is a wall of text giving detailed reasoning? They end up on page 11 within a day. Yet here we are, over 130 posts of exchange. Here's your chance to ask OP for details. Here's your chance to give OP reasoning why you consider the game better than they give it credit for.

>You have to evaluate a game with the time it was released in mind.
think your thought all the way to the end and you'll find your problem. It's one thing to keep context in mind. It's a whole different thing to dismiss any commentary with "it's the hardware" or "devs didn't know any better", or "it was a different time". We're very capable to review and analyze black and white silent movies from a century ago. Why do you deny us the same capability when it comes to games from 3 decades ago?

>Of course it feels lackluster compared to games that came years after it
why? Are shortstories lackluster compared to epic novels? Are acoustic albums lackluster compared to ones with electric instruments? Go on, tell the people why you consider these games lackluster in comparison.

>improved on it
That right there should enable you to tell openly what was bad with the game. I have my doubts though you can manage that without invoking age at some point

>had more budget, time
since when is that a criterion?

>people working on them
haven't played to many one man army games, I take it?

>you indeed have to be mature enough to see past it's shortcomings
you have to be immature enough to think of things as shortcomings that built the foundation for successors, that broke new gameplay mechanics, new narrative mechanics, and did the best they could with the available technology.

[Anonymous No.3276859]

>>3276830
>this pathetic excuse of a thread
frankly, the worst thing about this thread are the snot nosed elite wannabes that complain about youngsters, despite being so much a victim of their twisted expectations, they need to lie to themselves and insult and attack others.

>which just result in endless circlejerk which keep dragging this board down
if you want to see endless circlejerks dragging the board down, look at the likes of you dismissing any discussion of old games, calling the posters too young, just because they're afraid someone with a different perspective might discover all the little things you lied to yourself about for so long.
what keeps dragging the board down is endless complaints by people that only dislike what's posted, but make no attempts to post anything better, to actually improve the situation.

[Anonymous No.3276878]

>>3261526

>>The story ends

[Anonymous No.3277043]

>>3276854
>>3276859
People like you who defend "This game is bad because I say so" "Now that the dust has settled can we all agree X sucks?" "X didn't age well" and "is X the most overrated game ever?" threads should be ashamed.

[Anonymous No.3278530]

>>3261434
Bigest problem is the Manuel doesent auctualy say what the stats do.

[Anonymous No.3278538]

>>3278530
Also this Android port is fucking horrible I wish I could find a charger for my old phone that had a decent port

[Anonymous No.3278570]

>>3265771
DQ I and II are hot garbage tho.

[Anonymous No.3278679]

>>3261450
>It was revolutionary as fuck when it came out
It was just another poor Dragon Quest imitation

[Anonymous No.3278687]

>>3265825
Phantasy Star II

[Anonymous No.3278690]

>>3266208
Sounds dull and elementary

[Anonymous No.3278693]

>>3267408
WRPGs are fucking garbage. Piss off back to your Dungeon Master's guide, autismo.

[Anonymous No.3278698]

>>3268108
>meme posting
Mad because the Japs own Wizardry and Ultima is as dead as Jimmy Hoffa, champ?

[Anonymous No.3278701]

I played this in 1991. I think it was my first NES RPG (not counting the Zelda games). Anyway, I loved every minute of it, and soon followed up with Faxanadu and Dragon Warrior. Man, what a great year that was! Well other than the fact that someone stole my NES, and most of my other things.
Next year I bought a Sega Genesis but there wasn't much RPGs. Had fun with Faery Tale Adventure though. Also Shining in the Darkness, but someone borrowed that one before I finished and never gave it back!
That's about when I got an Amiga 500, but people used to stop by my room and hog the computer so I couldn't play Might & Magic III or Lemmings.
So actually, pretty much everything sucked after I lost my NES.

[Anonymous No.3278726]

>>3262378
> Wizardry had vancian magic
> vancian magic
/tips guisarme-voulge-bardiche

[Anonymous No.3278745]

>>3263901
> Is there a single thing FF did that Western Rpgs hadn't been doing years earlier on the PC?
Well a lot of people didn't have PCs, for one thing. Those were pretty expensive. So were Apple II computers and Macs.
If you were lucky kid and lived in the right western country, you maybe had a Commodore 64, and that one had a good number of RPGs. But if you were unlucky, you had something else, like Atari 800, Amstrad CPC, ZX Spectrum, TRS-80, or even some much more obscure cpmputers with even smaller game libraries. And then, FF1 on NES was something magical and new.
So really it's a matter of individual perspective. And that mattered a lot more back then in the 80's, unlike today where everything is completely connected.

[Anonymous No.3278758]

>>3278726
That's its name, mate.

[Anonymous No.3278768]

>>3265781
Well, can you really do better, on a system as limited as NES?

[Anonymous No.3280531]

>>3278701
>it was my first NES RPG
>(not counting the Zelda games)
That really should do without saying, considering the Zelda games aren't RPGs

[Anonymous No.3282430]

>>3265258
Actually there is some broken things about this game (not in the I can exploit things to break the game and win, way) like some items, spells, and certain stats are bugged but luckily nothing that will stop you from beating the game.

[Anonymous No.3282457]

>>3280531
Zelda 2 could be considered the only action RPG in the series

[Anonymous No.3284910]

>>3261434
play dragon warrior 1 first, then go back and play again.