Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

General Kaliero sent me a link to a Japanese site with news of a rumor that FFIV was going to be remade for the DS.

Found two articles today confirming the rumor, as well as pics of it.

http://www.dsfanboy.com/2007/05/09/first-look-at-final-fantasy-iv-3d-remake/
http://www.dsfanboy.com/2007/05/10/ffiv-3d-remake-compared-with-original-2d-games/

Pretty awesome, I'd say. And I'm surprised no one posted about it before me

This thread gave me an erection.

That's good for you, but do we really need to know about your personal fetishes?

On topic, I like the visual design. About just a bit less cartoony than IIIDS.

I saw it over at www.the-magicbox.com last week-ish...

http://the-magicbox.com/0705/game070509b.shtml

Meh.

Needs to be Chrono Trigger.

Still kinda cool, though.

I'm more excited about the newly announced Tactics Advance 2.

Originally posted by Lana
And I'm surprised no one posted about it before me If I was on the forums I would have, the Square Enix party took place this weekend (Sat/Sun) and the FFIV DS announcement came Saturday I believe :P

Originally posted by BackFire
Meh.

Needs to be Chrono Trigger.

Still kinda cool, though.

I'm more excited about the newly announced Tactics Advance 2. Who knows, it sounds like they opened a division devoted to remakes... they might give V and VI the 3D DS treatment and yeah, hopefully Chrono Trigger along the way...

i hate double posts

Originally posted by JKozzy
Who knows, it sounds like they opened a division devoted to remakes... they might give VI the 3D DS treatment and yeah, hopefully Chrono Trigger along the way...

oh god please yes... I'd buy a DS again just for that ><

I personally think 5, and 6 will be remade as well, because with 1 & 2 being on PSP for the 20 year anniversary this year. I see no reason why the other two classics won't be remade.

My 15 minutes to edit ran out.

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6170682.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=newstop&tag=newstop;title;14

*posts before General Kaliero does*

Video!

http://www.gametrailers.com/gamepage.php?id=4902

(scroll down a bit)

It looks...really pretty. DS game? Wouldn't know it by watching that.

Also it appears it's been in the works for some time before it was confirmed as it says "Coming 2007" at the end. If it's out in Japan by the end of 2007, then it should be out in the US by this time next year.

And the girl (who I am assuming to be Rosa) sounds very familiar to me. Need to know who that voice actor is...

Originally posted by Lana
General Kaliero sent me a link to a Japanese site with news of a rumor that FFIV was going to be remade for the DS.

Found two articles today confirming the rumor, as well as pics of it.

http://www.dsfanboy.com/2007/05/09/first-look-at-final-fantasy-iv-3d-remake/
http://www.dsfanboy.com/2007/05/10/ffiv-3d-remake-compared-with-original-2d-games/

Pretty awesome, I'd say. And I'm surprised no one posted about it before me


My favorite game of all time being remade for the Nintendo DS!!!! Christmas has come early!!

The last FF I played was way back in the days of my PS1. I think it was FF VII.

Anywhoo....I got a shiny new DS lite.

Is this game good for a FF noob like me?

Yeah, IV was the first RPG I ever played.

www.destructoid.com has an all CGI trailer for the game.

I don't think it would have killed you to link directly to the page with the video.

http://www.destructoid.com/final-fantasy-iv-ds-s-cgi-only-trailer-31796.phtml

And it's the same as the video I posted, anyway.

I agree with that dude. We don't need 13 Final Fantasy XIII spin offs. Start remake on VI!!! I want to hear Kefka's laugh again!!

But any who, it said a lot of the script was removed from the orginal release of IV and that this game will add that script back into it. That may add a few hours of gameplay.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
The last FF I played was way back in the days of my PS1. I think it was FF VII.

Anywhoo....I got a shiny new DS lite.

Is this game good for a FF noob like me?

Actually yes, because it's the first one that really had the modern idea of what we think of with FF- long term plot with characters dropping in/out of the group, focussing on their feelings/relationships- and has pre-set classes so you don't need to be getting into the mechanics of the job system.

Assuming all that stays intact.

Oh-Oooh!!!! I like that!

Basic and simple.

Yes it's a great starting rpg. Very easy to get into.

Backfire, I got FF6 on GBA in the mail from Amazon today, do you approve?

I'll be pre-ordering this remake most likely too.

I approve. Have you never played it before?

If not, you're in for a huge treat. Amazing game.

No, I never played any FF before 7, which I regretted.

So basically I never played the 'Original 3' that came to the US, all I know about plot details besides the intro is what nintendo power had.

I have all 6 between the DS/GBA now as well.

Originally posted by JToTheP
No, I never played any FF before 7, which I regretted.

So basically I never played the 'Original 3' that came to the US, all I know about plot details besides the intro is what nintendo power had.

I have all 6 between the DS/GBA now as well.

Man VI and VI (and now III thanks to the DS) are my favorite Final Fantasy games. Just wait till you get into Kefka and you can see that Kefka makes every villain look like a hero.

Yeah, Kefka is legendary.

Which Final Fantasy was Kefka in?

anata wa wakarimasu ka.....

FFVI, aka the one they were just talking about.

Well multiple Final Fantasy games were mentioned so I didn't know.

Geesh. Read.

anata wa wakarimasu ka.....

Yes read. It would become clear what game we were talking about had you read.

Originally posted by BackFire
Yeah, Kefka is legendary.

Kefka is the greatest video game villain of all time just because how psychic he is. "TODAY!! I'm going to KILL somebody muhaha!!"

I know. He's so purely evil and not in that "Oh, I'm evil but charismatic and cool" kind of way. You ****ing hate his guts by the end of the game, making the final confrontation so intense and awaited.

Mehh, he always underwhelmed me. Too comic book.

Eh, you can't please everyone.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Mehh, he always underwhelmed me. Too comic book.

Blasphemy!!

Where's my towel? It's whipping time!

Though of course it's possible my copy of FFVI was only fanslated.

I'll give it another shot sometime, I am sure.

Still gotta whip ya.

Sorry friend!

Well, that was an added bonus...

The GBA translation doesn't do much more for him. Kefka never struck me as anything like absolute evil. He was essentially a selfish coward who enjoyed being brutal to those who couldn't fight back and double-crossed everyone he could the first chance he got. Not a good person to be sure, but not exactly an epic, awe-inspiring villain.

Of course, I think many like him for being atypical like that. Just not my style of villain.

Well, his actions disagree with you, as he is one of the few villains who succeeded in conquering the world and such. If that's not epic I don't know what is.

Even a fool gets lucky once in a while. Sure, he conquered the world, but not really through any skill of his own. His spur-of-the-moment, "guess I'll just kill you now" brand of scheming is not as epic as the quiet, carefully calculated down to every detail evil planning of truly great villainy.

I don't think luck was a part of it. He WAS scheming the entire time. He was planning the attack on Ghestal for a long while, which allowed him to destroy the world.

Besides, he was evil, but he was also brutally insane. He wasn't meant to be that generic 'evil but brilliant' villain that we see everywhere. He was meant to be evil and insane, but competent. It makes him all the better, and really, all the more hate able. He's not likeable at all, he's despicable and annoying, no redeeming qualities. As evil should be shown.

The trouble with Kefka is that not only is he scheming, he also lies to make himself look better. Like with Celes' betrayal. Knowing that he works like that, taking things as they come and then making it look like it was what he intended, you really can't be sure how much was plan, and how much was just stuff happening. Sure, power-hungry as he was he certainly intended to off Gestahl at some point, but I doubt he had planned to do it exactly how he did.

Where's the fun in hating someone designed to be hated? I like me villains charismatic. A person who you could get along with, if not for the small detail of their agenda including your eventual demise. That allows a deeper character, which in my opinion makes for a better villain.

Err, the whole paint of a villain is to hate them. The sheer hatred one feels for Kefka by the end of the game makes the final confrontation among the most intense and long awaited I've encountered.

When a villain is charismatic, it becomes self defeating. If you like a villain, then the final confrontation won't feel very tense or satisfying. Hence why I think Sephiroth is so sumpremely overrated. He treads in shades of grey, you can understand him, why he's doing what he's doing. And while he's sitting there discussing his reasons, causing you to understand his plight and allowing for understanding, Kefka will just walk up and kill him and laugh then run away, for no reason other than just being so purely evil.

A villain like Kefka is rare. More often than not, they're of the charismatic nature, like Sephiroth and so on. Kefka is a breath of fresh air, a villain who reminds us the point of a villain - To hate them.

Kefka forced people to worship him and would kill them off if they refused. After he became supreme ruler of the planet he came to the conclusion that mortal life is meaningless and so goes off to kill every last single lifeform on the planet. The final battle against Kefka he wasn't like he was throughout the game but actually serious. He wasn't joking, he never laughed, he was dead serious. I was more afraid then excited because he reshaped the entire world and turned it into a dark world when he was insane. And now he was serious. Kefka became magic by absorbing the power of the statues. That's bad@$$. Sephiroth is all calm and quiet and actually comes to Cloud telling him his plans. WTF? Why tell the heroes what your plan is then leave them alive so they have a chance to stop you?


Any who, I don't see how IV DS got into this discussion about Kefka. The villain we should be talking is the powerful Zemus who controlled Golbez and threw the entire world into chaos.

Originally posted by BackFire
Err, the whole paint of a villain is to hate them. The sheer hatred one feels for Kefka by the end of the game makes the final confrontation among the most intense and long awaited I've encountered.

When a villain is charismatic, it becomes self defeating. If you like a villain, then the final confrontation won't feel very tense or satisfying. Hence why I think Sephiroth is so sumpremely overrated. He treads in shades of grey, you can understand him, why he's doing what he's doing. And while he's sitting there discussing his reasons, causing you to understand his plight and allowing for understanding, Kefka will just walk up and kill him and laugh then run away, for no reason other than just being so purely evil.

A villain like Kefka is rare. More often than not, they're of the charismatic nature, like Sephiroth and so on. Kefka is a breath of fresh air, a villain who reminds us the point of a villain - To hate them.

Well, just personal preference, then. I like knowing the motivations for why this one person decided that they must go through with their huge, world-altering plan. And I like when they actually have a plan where they truly believe what they are doing is for the greater good.

As opposed to Kefka, who has no such plan. He simply wants the entire world to stop existing, just because he thinks it's all meaningless. His very intention is as comparatively bland to others' as he is to more interesting villains, such as Tales of the Abyss' Van.

See villains that think they are doing good really makes them seem confused where as Kefka knows he's doing bad and just doesn't give a rat's @$$. That's what's so bad@$$ about Kefka.

But villains who "know they're doing bad" seem so... unrealistic. No one actually does something without believing it to be in some way good. Those villains don't seem confused; they are dead sure that what they are doing is for the best. The heroes just happen to not agree with them on that point.

Dhaos from Tales of Phantasia, for example. He had the right idea, he just went about achieving it the wrong way. To the point where players were often forced to re-examine the entire quest and decide whether what they were doing was actually the "right" thing. Ultimately, if you thought about all the angles, you would reaffirm that the heroes were indeed in the right and Dhaos had to be stopped. That hardened your resolve and deepened your belief in the quest, making the final fight against Dhaos all the more powerful.

That sort of epic quality is why I prefer deeper, more realistic villains as opposed to the "Kekeke, I'm so evil! " Kefka brand.

Kefka thought by ridding the world of every living thing he WAS doing good. As his philosophy was that everything was pointless and only worthy of being destroyed.

Originally posted by BackFire
Yes read. It would become clear what game we were talking about had you read. Originally posted by InnerRise
Well multiple Final Fantasy games were mentioned so I didn't know.

Geesh. Read.

anata wa wakarimasu ka..... anata wa wakarimasu ka.....

Originally posted by BackFire
Kefka thought by ridding the world of every living thing he WAS doing good. As his philosophy was that everything was pointless and only worthy of being destroyed.

But does he ever make the player think that maybe, just maybe, he's right?

I thought not.

Originally posted by General Kaliero
But does he ever make the player think that maybe, just maybe, he's right?

I thought not.

A villain who thinks he's doing right really isn't much of a villain. He thinks he's doing right and yet the heroes think he's doing wrong. Where as Kefka just doesn't give a crap.

Perhaps not, but he is much more of a character. A villain in the traditional sense, such as Kefka, or Garland/Chaos, simply cannot be as interesting or compelling as a more realistic, untraditional villain like Golden Sun's Alex.

Or at least, that is my opinion. I like plots with shades of grey, others like their stories and characters to be black and white.

Originally posted by General Kaliero
But does he ever make the player think that maybe, just maybe, he's right?

I thought not.

What the heck does that have to do with anything?

He makes the player think that HE thinks he's right, and he's all the more despicable for it.

It's like you don't even like actual villains, just enemies who are on the opposite side, with shades of grey and all that pretentious BS that's so trendy and cliche these days.

Kefka may not have had many shades of grey, but enough other characters did as to make the story not simplistic, as you are alluding to.

Wasn't your point that Kefka wasn't likeable? No, I don't like Kefka. He did his job, but in the end he was just the next in a long line of stereotypical villains.

Just because you don't like a certain villain style, it's "pretentious BS" that's "trendy and cliche"? Why do you think that style is used? In the real world, people never do things unless they think it is for the good of themselves or the greater good. "Shades of grey" villains emulate that, and are more realistic for it. Since plot is one of the most important aspects of an RP, I like my RP plots realistic, even if the world is not.

No, it's pretentious BS that's trendy in Cliche because it is trendy and cliche. I say pretentious because it usually is. The creators think that by making a villain that isn't all bad, it's inherently "deep" or "complex". And apparently people buy into that.

It's used so much because it's simply easier to create a villain with shades of grey, rather than a villain that is genuinely disgusting and hateable, hence why just about every RPG now has a villain like that, the kind you like, because they're easier to create and people are quick to gobble up the illusion that it makes the story more complex or plausable "Oh, he's trying to take over the world, but look, he gave a little boy money OOHH THOUGHT PROVOKING, he's not all bad! That's deep!!". Which is something I'd call utter nonsense. In real life there are people without shades of grey, who do horrific acts that any normal person would deam as purely evil and brutal.

And again, Kefka DID think what he was doing was good for himself and was for the greater good. By controlling the world and destroying everyone who opposed him, he felt he was making the world a better place, for him, which is the only person he cared about.

Originally posted by BackFire
No, it's pretentious BS that's trendy in Cliche because it is trendy and cliche. I say pretentious because it usually is. The creators think that by making a villain that isn't all bad, it's inherently "deep" or "complex". And apparently people buy into that.

Trouble with saying that is it's annoyingly hard to prove an opinion as fact.



Where did you get that idea? Have you ever attempted to write up characters of your own? I have, and from my myriad characters ranging in all brands of good and evil, I can definitely say "evil for the hell of it" villains are the easiest to write of the lot. It takes barely any effort at all. Simply write a scene with the guy kicking a few puppies, and people will hate him. They won't say he was a very interesting character, but they will hate him.




And the amusing hyperbole begins!

I'd call your example utter nonsense, as well. Because it doesn't happen. I'll use Dhaos as an example again. He put the world on a path to eventual decay and destruction because doing so would allow him to save his own world. Obviously, it's wrong to destroy a world, but in his opinion he was committing a heroic act. He was noble, not doing random acts of insignificant kindness.



Who?



Er... no. His intent was to annihilate the world and everything in it, not rule it. He never felt he was making the world a better place, he felt the whole thing was absolutely meaningless and ought to be unmade, period.

Originally posted by General Kaliero
Trouble with saying that is it's annoyingly hard to prove an opinion as fact.

Yes, hence why everything here is opinion, never implied otherwise.



Originally posted by General Kaliero
Where did you get that idea? Have you ever attempted to write up characters of your own? I have, and from my myriad characters ranging in all brands of good and evil, I can definitely say "evil for the hell of it" villains are the easiest to write of the lot. It takes barely any effort at all. Simply write a scene with the guy kicking a few puppies, and people will hate him. They won't say he was a very interesting character, but they will hate him.

I have, and shades of grey villains seem easier than genuinely (key word) hateable and evil villains. The guy kicking dogs wouldn't be effective, because people would see it as a lazy and over the top way of making you hate him. I never felt Kefka went that way. He came close, I won't deny that, but just when you thought he might go over the top and hurt his own character development, he'd do something that felt very real, and very evil.

Again, if you want shades of grey, there are numerous characters that approach that side of things in the game (Shadow, Ghestal, General Leo), they purposely made Kefka as horrid as possible, they made him a true villain. The theme was Good vs Pure evil, it would have hurt the game, by a significant amount, to have a villain that wasn't fully evil. Other games can make it work because they build around the "there is no right" thought process, and make both sides somewhat understandable. This clearly wasn't their intent with this game.



Originally posted by General Kaliero
And the amusing hyperbole begins!

I'd call your example utter nonsense, as well. Because it doesn't happen. I'll use Dhaos as an example again. He put the world on a path to eventual decay and destruction because doing so would allow him to save his own world. Obviously, it's wrong to destroy a world, but in his opinion he was committing a heroic act. He was noble, not doing random acts of insignificant kindness.

Hehehe, I'm glad you enjoyed my hyperbole, I enjoyed yours as well.

Chaos (Dhaos was a typo, no?) sounds like a legitimely good villain, than. I'm not saying good grey villains don't exist. Just denying the idea that having a character not be totally evil is inherently better, or by default more complex, it isn't always the case, I think.


Originally posted by General Kaliero
Who?

Hitler? For one.


Originally posted by General Kaliero
Er... no. His intent was to annihilate the world and everything in it, not rule it. He never felt he was making the world a better place, he felt the whole thing was absolutely meaningless and ought to be unmade, period.

Yes, he did feel he was making the world a better place for HIM. No one else mattered, just himself and his own brutal philosophy of life being utterly meaningless. He didn't want to destroy the world completely. Had this been the case, he would have, he left people alive purposely, he could have killed every single one of them once he was in control, but he wanted power, and he wanted destruction. He knew he couldn't have both if he killed everyone, so he left some alive, he allowed them to live in fear, so he could have power, and destroy them later, if need be.

Originally posted by BackFire
Yes, hence why everything here is opinion, never implied otherwise.

Then it's not because "it is," it's because "I think it is." Yes?



Kefka was an insane clown. He was all about being over the top. Like a comic book villain:



Stubborn, ignorant of minions' distrust, shouty, and dealing in absolutes: exterminate everyone. What city is he going to attack next, Metropolis?



And here I was under the impression the game had a unique theme for each of the main characters... which they, you know, spent the entire game developing. Since they're, like, the main characters and the story is about them.



No, Dhaos was not a typo. He's the main villain of Tales of Phantasia, a game released a year after FFVI. Back when a sympathetic villain was still relatively unheard of.

Just being evil is a rather flat base for characterization, whereas being just opposed allows for much greater depth, simply because it's more to build off of. You can only do so much and still stay within the "pure evil" spectrum; a lot more is open to "shades of grey" villains.



Godwin's Law.

And even Hitler wasn't totally evil. He honestly thought he was facilitating the rule of the "Master Race." Yes, his views were wrong, but he wasn't the purest, abject manifestation of all that is, was, and ever shall be unholy.



I'm sorry, but you're simply wrong. That may have been the temporary situation after he caused the World of Ruin, but I was talking about his final intentions. Endgame, just before the final battle:



Hmm... yeah, not seeing much desire to rule.

In my recollection of it all- which may be imperfect- Kefka did just strike me as a jumped up thug, which doesn;t really do it for me, and with comic book rantings. He really was just... 'there'.

Unlike Sephiroth in VII, who they gave a large amount of backstory to, which worked rather well.

(Also because Sephiroth was understated in person, rather than always ranting)

Kefka, essentially, is a nihilist, a view that is just as boring in real life as it is in fiction, and unless explored in a very specific way that's a crappy motivation for a bad guy.

It's even worse because, as I say, Kefka is just 'some guy' who ends up being powerful. At least the Emperor in Star Wars is representative of something of great cosmological significance, though really it only works because he is played well, and in any case the most iconic villain of Star Wars- and perhaps of all time in any medium- is Darth Vader, a character we have in far more motivational detail.

It's not much to do with shades of grey or pure evil. Both approaches work in different contexts according to how well you do them. Sure, just putting in a few random non-evil acts to a bad guy to try and make him more interesting is prety crappy, but then the litany of shades of grey bad guys in films over time that have achieved classic status is huge, and with good reason.

Kefka is pure evil, that's not a big problem, it is simply that to the best of my recollection I found him really boring.

Kefka is a nut case; a psycho who takes joy in killing like how he murdered General Leo from behind then took joy in killing the Emperor. Kefka begun to think of himself as a god and found mortal life pointless.


And isn't a dicussion on Kefka off topic on a Final Fantasy IV DS thread? If anything Zemus (and Golbez) should be the topic of discussion. Heck IV gave off one of the biggest video game twists I ever seen. The bad guy you were trying so hard to defeat turned out to be Cecil's brother. Golbez was bad@$$.

Okay, I've let the thread derailment go on long enough. No more, okay?

Originally posted by General Kaliero
Then it's not because "it is," it's because "I think it is." Yes?

Dude, don't be that guy. Don't be the guy who start complaining when someone doesn't put "I think" in front of something that is very clearly a matter of opinion. I thought the context of the discussion, and the topic being discussed was subjective enough to show that everything I was/am saying is a matter of opinion, and didn't need to put "I think" in front of everything.



Originally posted by General Kaliero
Kefka was an insane clown. He was all about being over the top. Like a comic book villain:



Stubborn, ignorant of minions' distrust, shouty, and dealing in absolutes: exterminate everyone. What city is he going to attack next, Metropolis?

"Destroy all who oppose us". That's not over the top at all, dictators have that mentality all the time. When he said "Destroy everyone" he was referring to everyone in Narsh, which was because they opposed him.



Originally posted by General Kaliero
And here I was under the impression the game had a unique theme for each of the main characters... which they, you know, spent the entire game developing. Since they're, like, the main characters and the story is about them.

It did, but it's over all theme, or backbone, was good vs evil. Had Kefka been anything but pure evil the game simply wouldn't have worked. As said, it was entirely built around that idea, and as such it was essential to have that type of main villain.



Originally posted by General Kaliero
No, Dhaos was not a typo. He's the main villain of Tales of Phantasia, a game released a year after FFVI. Back when a sympathetic villain was still relatively unheard of.

Just being evil is a rather flat base for characterization, whereas being just opposed allows for much greater depth, simply because it's more to build off of. You can only do so much and still stay within the "pure evil" spectrum; a lot more is open to "shades of grey" villains.

It can be flat, but it can also work and be very true to life, as some people are just bad for no discernible reason.

And yes! Thank you for proving why it's more difficult to make a good genuinely evil villain, because you don't have as much to work with if pure evil is your intent. Also, because it's difficult to make a villain purely evil, without having him cross over into that over the top realm, which again, I never felt Kefka did.


Originally posted by General Kaliero
Godwin's Law.

And even Hitler wasn't totally evil. He honestly thought he was facilitating the rule of the "Master Race." Yes, his views were wrong, but he wasn't the purest, abject manifestation of all that is, was, and ever shall be unholy.

I wasn't naming someone who was the pure manifestation of evil, merely someone who WAS evil and who's actions could not be defended or understood. Hitler was one where a normal person, with basic morals could sit and say "You know, I can understand where he's coming from, I'm conflicted and kind of agree with what he did". What he did was so purely wrong, so utterly evil, that one couldn't help but know that he was wrong. Hence why I named him. There wasn't shades of grey in his actions.

Originally posted by General Kaliero
I'm sorry, but you're simply wrong. That may have been the temporary situation after he caused the World of Ruin, but I was talking about his final intentions. Endgame, just before the final battle

Yes, I misunderstood your meaning, my apologies. His ultimate intent was to eventually destroy all things, yes.

Oops, sorry Lana, didn't see that post of yours. Consider it dropped on my end.

Dropped as well.

So... anyone want to argue about Golbez?

Originally posted by General Kaliero
Dropped as well.

So... anyone want to argue about Golbez?

Sure...I think Golbez was suppose to be based off Darth Vader or something. I mean they have a lot in common.

BUMPED!!

The thread doesn't need to get bumped, people will bump it with news updates/videos/images, as well as themselves.

Originally posted by JToTheP
The thread doesn't need to get bumped, people will bump it with news updates/videos/images, as well as themselves.

No, they're make a new thread not even bothering with the search then Lana will close it and the thread maker will b!tch and whine.

Don't bump a thread for no reason at all, you should know better...

Game was released in Japan a week and a half ago...I knew it was going to be released there around Christmas but only just discovered it was out already while poking around on play-asia

Hope we get it soon...

Is there not a set release date for America, yet?

Not yet, that I'm aware of.

No release date yet...dang. This game is going to own.

Shame

Bumping due to game's release next month and the fact that this game is just going to pwn

So I picked up the game on Saturday, and I've got about 10 hours on it so far. I'm having a great time, though I've gotten so unused to the ATB...

Games on the DS suck. I don't know why gamers would save up their money to get something with graphics as bad as the Wii's. Save up on a PS3 or a 360 for god sakes it'll be worth the months of saving. Final Fantasy on the DS? This game will suck. Sorry if I'm sounding like an ass (lol) but I'm just telling the truth here.

Originally posted by Nemesis X
Games on the DS suck. I don't know why gamers would save up their money to get something with graphics as bad as the Wii's. Save up on a PS3 or a 360 for god sakes it'll be worth the months of saving. Final Fantasy on the DS? This game will suck. Sorry if I'm sounding like an ass (lol) but I'm just telling the truth here.

Because some people care more about a good game than shiny graphics. Not really a difficult concept.

Not only that, but this is the...fifth or sixth Final Fantasy on the DS. It's also a remake of an SNES game.

Originally posted by Nemesis X
Sorry if I'm sounding like an ass (lol) but I'm just telling my biased and unresearched personal opinion here.
Fix'd.

The DS has a better games library than the PS3 for certain, and many would argue better than the 360 as well. It's a definite fact that the DS is one of the consistently best-selling pieces of gaming hardware in the history of the industry.

Also, the game is superb, with very pretty design and incredible music and sound quality.

Originally posted by Nemesis X
Games on the PSP suck. I don't know why gamers would save up their money to get something with games as bad as the PS3's. Save up on a Wii or a 360 for god sakes it'll be worth the months of saving. Final Fantasy on the PSP? This game will suck. Sorry if I'm sounding like an ass (lol) but I'm just telling the truth here.

Fixed.

Well I just beat the game and I must say I am impressed with the game. Doing my second playthrough now; just kind of playing around a lot with the mini-games.

Originally posted by ESB -1138
Fixed.

Well I just suck at the game and I must say I am depressed with the game. Doing my second playthrough now and I suck even worse; just kind of playing around a lot with the stupid mini-games (which I also suck at).

Fixed

Dude, don't ever give the PS3 crap and the Wii blows!

Originally posted by Nemesis X
Fixed

Dude, don't ever give the PS3 crap and the Wii blows!
You, sir, are most grievously misinformed.

Originally posted by Nemesis X
Fixed

Dude, don't ever give the PS3 crap and the Wii blows!

Let's see the Wii has better games and cost less then the PS3. Only worth while game for the PS3 is Metal Gear Solid 4 and I'm pretty sure they'll put out a special edition version for the 360; considering Sony has pretty much lost every other exclusive game it ever kept (including Final Fantasy XIII).



Any who; moving pass the Sony fanboy who can't accept that the once proud Sony company has screwed up beyond reason; this game is amazing. Just became a paladin and heading to Baron to kick a little fiend's @$$.

Originally posted by ESB -1138
Let's see the Wii has better games and cost less

Has better games ??

like what Red steel and gingerbread man

and just because it costs less does'nt mean its better




I may not have a PS3 myself but theres more then that one game the PS3 you idiot.

Take the "which system is better" arguing to the proper thread.

Yea nemesis X

Originally posted by Kazenji
Yea nemesis X
You too.

How so ?

i just caught the end of this one but going back a page Seems like Nemesis X and ESB -1138 fired up this debate in this thread.

Because it goes for everybody. Not really that difficult.

Now how about we drop it and go back to discussing FFIV, which is the topic of this thread?

Originally posted by Peach


Now how about we drop it and go back to discussing FFIV, which is the topic of this thread?

Indeed !