Eyes on Final Fantasy Forums > Final Fantasy: Nerds in Paradise > Final Fantasy VI > Final Fantasy VI...

[arcanedude34]

O_o This thread in like a breeding ground for fanboys.

Anyway, I grew up on the PS1. Yup I said it. I love the 3D Final Fantasies. Yup I said it. I also love the 2D Final Fantasies. Yup I said it. Personally, I thought VIII was a crappy game, easily the worst in the series imo. But if your favorite FF is VIII, then hey, whatever. It's your opinion, I can't make you hate the game, nor do I care to. If all you talk about is VIII, or if you try to make me play it, then yea, I'm gonna prolly ignore you at most. What I'm trying to say is, can't we all just live and let live? They're games, no need to act like immature little kids because someone doesn't have the same tastes as you. If FFVII fanboys can't appreciate any other FF, then hey, their loss right? And if FFVI nuts won't let go of the past, then hey their loss right?

Just so you know, if all you care about is VII, then you got two (2) versions of the original VII to enjoy, plus a bunch of effortless spinoffs (all of which I sadly enjoyed) to play over and over. It's gonna get old. If you refuse to play a game after VI, then prepare to waste your money on remake after remake after remake, cuz I see no end of the barrage of sequels. Both groups are missing out on some great gomes, either way.


You fanboys are getting to be as bad as (dare I say it?) religious folk.

[Bolivar]

Originally Posted by Ultima9999 ^

I have told many people who grew up post NES and SNES who played Final Fantasy VII for the PS1 that VI was the best in the series and they can't wrap their minds around the fact that Final Fantasy VI broke the mold with the story that was told. I look at these Hard Core Final Fantasy VII fans and they just don't know the pure beauty of what this game had to offer.

You're making a generalization for people you can't speak for.

First of all, there are kids these days growing up post SNES and PS1 even that are of the thought that VI trumped VII (Goldenboko, PuPu on this site). Second, there are plenty of people who played VII first and took the time to play through FFVI and simply couldn't see what all the fuss is about, I think that's the entire point of Kenshin's thread here, and of the last "What's the Big Deal?" thread in the VI forum.

Third, I would ask what the hell are you talking about with the whole "VI broke the mold with the story" comment. On the multiple times I've played/beaten it, I've found the dialogue just as thoughtless and cliche as the previous FF's, with an extremely underdeveloped villain, and I actually think some 16-bit RPGs I played when I had never even heard about FFVI are alot better, story included.

If I would say any Final Fantasy thats Overrated it would have to be Final Fantasy VII cause it needs to constantly prove it's the best in the series with its spin-offs where as Final Fantasy VI needs none of that to prove that its a great game and far more superior.

I'm not sure how a game tries to prove its the best with spin-offs, that's an odd statement right there, and many fans of the game don't even bother playing them.

Originally Posted by ,,,

And I'll ignore the fact that you called me... what was it? *glances back up* Oh, childish and whiny, because I have to accept the fact that when people debate online they tend to talk in condescending ways. I'm not saying I'm an exception to the rule.

That comment wasn't directed towards you. To actually answer your question, I really don't think there is a set number/ratio where we could determine if something is underrated - because it's not about how many people like a game. "Crime and Punishment" is considered one of the best novels of all time but it will probably never have as many enthusiasts as say, The Lord of the Rings, but does that mean it's underrated? No. Underrated references the popular consensus, not whether something is popular or not.

[,,,]

Originally Posted by Bolivar ^

That comment wasn't directed towards you. To actually answer your question, I really don't think there is a set number/ratio where we could determine if something is underrated - because it's not about how many people like a game. "Crime and Punishment" is considered one of the best novels of all time but it will probably never have as many enthusiasts as say, The Lord of the Rings, but does that mean it's underrated? No. Underrated references the popular consensus, not whether something is popular or not.

I know it wasn't directed at me, but I am in the "jealousy" crowd, so you basically did call me that. I don't mind though, I'm pretty sure kenshin called me a retard back there somewhere, so we're cool. Yeah, I'm a 25 y/o with a Master's degree being called a retard by... *checks his profile*.... crap, no age given. Well, that kills my joke. I was hoping to be able to finish with: "by a 16 y/o. I love the internet!" Well, so much for that. That one wasn't directed at me either. I think it was VI fanpersons. I... wait, am I one of those? I love the game probably more than it deserves. That's fanpersonage, right? Screw it, back to topic.

Anyway, I see what you're getting at, although the analogy would work better if you took stuff from the same genre. Let's see, I haven't read any bad Russian literature, so we'll stick with Lord of the Rings and add.... let's say harry God damn potter. Alright, well I guess it's two different ways of looking at it. I can see what you're saying. On one hand, the LotR series is well acclaimed, so you would say it isn't underrated. But on the other hand, it's good enough that it ought to be more well acclaimed than the potter books, but it isn't. Well, this analogy isn't working perfectly either, since the potter books haven't had the test of time that the LotR series has, and maybe in 20 years things will be as they should be, while with those two FFs are both fairly close in time. Anyway, discounting the fans completely and just looking at how they're remembered by.... gaming historians? ok, now I'm confused, do we have gaming historians? Please say no. You know, I don't know what to think anymore. But is it really wrong to say that vi is underrated by fans? Can't we just be talking about two different things? vi is underrated by fans, but not underrated by.... gameologists. I think that makes sense. But it's past 4 AM.

In fact, I think there are a number of angles you could look at it.

We could be talking about underrated as in, underrated by the fans. I would still vote vi as being underrated for not being above vii when I feel it ought to be.

Or we could be talking about critical acclaim. If that's it, I may be a big enough geek to post on a FF message board, but I'm not a big enough geek to read dozens of reviews on each game and see which one got the better rating, so I don't know which way that'd go.

Or we could be talking about its contribution to gaming "history" or whatever, and if that's the case, blah though I think it is, vii did bring FF to the mainstream for better or worse and I don't think vi made any contributions that big, so in that case I guess vii does deserve its #1 spot, and vi is not underrated for being below it.

Or we could be talking about how well known it is. vii has to be the most well known, vi is not as well known but it ought to be known... so vi could be underrated there too.

Then there's the usefulness of the object itself. vii's disk makes a great frisbee or coaster, while that cartridge of vi isn't good for anything, so it doesn't deserve to be rated as high as vii there either.

I get the feeling I should stop now.

[champagne supernova]

Originally Posted by ,,, ^

Anyway, I see what you're getting at, although the analogy would work better if you took stuff from the same genre. Let's see, I haven't read any bad Russian literature, so we'll stick with Lord of the Rings and add....

I object to that. Dostoevsky is one of the most acclaimed authors in the world. And the Russians dominate the literature scene. They've got Dostoevsky (mentioned above), Chekhov, Tolstoy and Nabakov. Lolita is probably the greatest piece of contemporary fiction. So, this is definitely not bad Russian literature.

Anyway, what Bolivar's point is that VI and VII probably have the same critical acclaim. Popular acclaim is a completely different story. So, Bolivar's point is that, although Crime & Punishment is not as popularly acclaimed as Lord of the Rings, it is more critically acclaimed. And then it is not under-rated.

[,,,]

^ I wasn't calling that book bad Russian literature, I meant I didn't know of anything Russian that was bad to compare it to. Lolita is one of my favorites, but for Nabokov I prefer Pale Fire, my favorite novel of all time. I'm reading Bend Sinister by him right now.

Oh, and don't leave out Gogol. Dead Souls is the funniest thing I've ever read.

[Ultima9999]

"I'm not sure how a game tries to prove its the best with spin-offs, that's an odd statement right there, and many fans of the game don't even bother playing them."

How do you figure. Everytime I get on the internet, read a video gaming magazine, or walk into a video gaming store, theres talk of another final fantasy VII spin-off. Why have all these spin-offs of a game that wasn't even all that great. Unless its trying to make a moot point and show how great and grand VII was.

"Third, I would ask what the hell are you talking about with the whole "VI broke the mold with the story" comment. On the multiple times I've played/beaten it, I've found the dialogue just as thoughtless and cliche as the previous FF's, with an extremely underdeveloped villain, and I actually think some 16-bit RPGs I played when I had never even heard about FFVI are alot better, story included."

Are you serious The story telling in VI was great and within the story itself there were back storys to ever character. They didn't have to come out with a prequel, or a sequel for that matter to explain why sabain left the kingdom behind, or why gau was some wild child, or what life was like for Cyan before his family was murdered. It was all there in the game. The story was so in depth there could never be another like it. Thats what I mean as in it broke the mold. Some storys in a video game can get convoluted and messy this one didn't. each playable character had something to offer. Underdeveloped Villain...I agree with you to an extent Keffka was an all out BADASS he didn't carry a sword (It was a Kick ass sword) as Sephiroth did but he was funny (I agree a little corney at times) but he was another character that I enjoyed. He didn't give a flying you know what about who he hurt he was all out destructive.

We could sit and debate this for eons but like most of us we will have our favorite FF games and are Dislikes of other FF games.

If you have something else to add, feel free to use the "edit/delete" button rather than double posting. - Flying Mullet

[Bolivar]

Originally Posted by Ultima9999 ^

How do you figure. Everytime I get on the internet, read a video gaming magazine, or walk into a video gaming store, theres talk of another final fantasy VII spin-off. Why have all these spin-offs of a game that wasn't even all that great. Unless its trying to make a moot point and show how great and grand VII was.

Why: Because it was a popular game to which there is a large demand for expansion of its storyline and new productions featuring its characters/world.

Hater Translation: Because Big Corporations like Square-Enix like to milk it for everything its worth.

Whichever translation suites you, that should be obvious enough.

Originally Posted by 9999

Are you serious The story telling in VI was great and within the story itself there were back storys to ever character. They didn't have to come out with a prequel, or a sequel for that matter to explain why sabain left the kingdom behind, or why gau was some wild child, or what life was like for Cyan before his family was murdered. It was all there in the game. The story was so in depth there could never be another like it. Thats what I mean as in it broke the mold. Some storys in a video game can get convoluted and messy this one didn't. each playable character had something to offer. Underdeveloped Villain...I agree with you to an extent Keffka was an all out BADASS he didn't carry a sword (It was a Kick ass sword) as Sephiroth did but he was funny (I agree a little corney at times) but he was another character that I enjoyed. He didn't give a flying you know what about who he hurt he was all out destructive.

The only thing "great" about VI's storytelling was the use of Uematsu's ingenious score, which could convey such powerful emotions with such a limited amount of resources.

Again, the dialogue was trifle. It was the same amount of crap you would expect from characters stuck inside of a video game, not characters in a story.

There was nothing deep about it. Everything is on the surface, there is no unique insight which the player is supposed to be left with. "fight for what's right!", "never give up!", "if you get your teen girlfriend pregnant, support her!". These are all a priori values which would are accepted by nearly every culture without any heated debate. If you (or anyone else) knows of any themes which go deeper than this in Final Fantasy VI, please, let me know, in this thread, or send me a PM, because I'd seriously like to find out what they are.

[Ultima9999]

Well not to have a pissing contest with you The storyline was great regradless of what you think about it. The story for me was one of the best and yes the musical score was unreal liked it so much I bought the CD a few months later and it helped with the story. But for me the story was strong and powerful and it may be cliche for how the story was told and the dialog may not have been to your liking but for me it was decent.