Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Final Fantasy vs. Oblivion

Zonk posted more than 8 years ago | from the ready-fight dept.

141

An anonymous reader writes "bit-tech has up a short comparison between Final Fantasy VII and Oblivion. While Oblivion is touted as the latest and greatest PC-based RPG, Final Fantasy VII is held in the minds of many gamers as the best RPG of all time. From the article: 'At the time of its release, nearly ten years ago, FFVII received rave reviews from the press and the public, and it has a claim to being the best loved Final Fantasy game ... In a Top 100 Games of all time, it would be up there in the single digits. It is, by all accounts, Sergeant Pepper-Citizen Kane great. If something is great, it should be great whenever you pick it up -- buy a fresh copy of Pepper or Kane now and they'll still blow you away: they were great in '67 and '41, and they're great now. Is the same true of FFVII?'"

cancel ×

141 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Short answer... (5, Insightful)

chrismcdirty (677039) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503134)

No. The graphics aren't as great as they were perceived when it first came out. I'd much rather play a great sprite-based game (FFVI) than a game with early 3D graphics.

Then again, graphics aren't everything. But FF6 beats it in the story department, too. And the gameplay department.

Re:Short answer... (3, Insightful)

Evanisincontrol (830057) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503231)

I'd venture to say that it's in the eye of the beholder. I loved both FFVI and FFVII, and honestly I thought both stories were very intricate and well developed. FFVI was more complex, to be sure; there were over a dozen characters, each with a believable (for a fantasy game) back-story that tied in to at least one other character's back story.

But on the other hand, FFVII had more than just evil villains conquering the world by force; it had a hero battling with himself, discovering the truth about his path and his very existence, his identity. Think "Fight Club" and "Memento."

As far as gameplay, well, that's debatable on every level. Someone happens to get hooked on a certain battle system or control system, and sudddenly it's the best game ever in their eyes. I won't venture into that territory.

Regardless, I agree that FFVI was amazing, but I'd still put FFVII up there in the ranks with the best.

Re:Short answer... (2, Insightful)

AuMatar (183847) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503260)

I find Kefka far more evil than Sephiroth, who seemed more like a bad caricature of a villain. ANd except for the Aeris parts of the story, the FF7 story just seemed contrived. When you put everything together at the end, it still didn't really make sense.

Re:Short answer... (1)

flooey (695860) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503328)

I find Kefka far more evil than Sephiroth, who seemed more like a bad caricature of a villain. ANd except for the Aeris parts of the story, the FF7 story just seemed contrived. When you put everything together at the end, it still didn't really make sense.

You might want to take a look at the Final Fantasy VII Ultimania Omega [ign.com] , which was a book published in Japan that explains the story. After reading that, especially seeing exactly how Jenova, Sephiroth, Cloud, and Zack all are connected, it makes a whole lot more sense.

Re:Short answer... (2, Insightful)

jgclark123 (812195) | more than 8 years ago | (#15504697)

If I wanted to read a book to get the story, I'd read a book! Video games that have intricate stories (especially RPGs) should not need to be augmented with a book just to understand the storyline.
I could, however, see supplementary books with the Halo series. Not everyone cares about the story, it is kind of a mindless FPS.

Re:Short answer... (0)

Evanisincontrol (830057) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503414)

Without meaning to sound like a fanboy defending his beloved idle game.. (Chrono Trigger is my favorite RPG of all time anyway)

To me, Sephiroth was the epithome of a bad guy. Chalk it up to the sprites, I guess, but I always thought Kefka looked like a fruit. Sephiroth carried a sword that was taller than him, cut down people like toys, and laughed afteward. (Think about the scene where Nibelheim is burning. Sephiroth burned the town down and then danced around in it because it was fun.)

As far as the story, I think it's confusing too. That's probably I still play it all over again once every year or so; because you pick up little details and intricacies that add to your previous understanding of the game, and every time it's like you're playing a whole new story again. If you've ever played FFVII more than once, I guarantee you've said outloud, "Ohhhhhhhhhhh, NOW I know why he said that." I haven't touched FF in over a year, and now I'm tempted to sit down and play again, just to remind myself who the hell Zack was and why I seem to think Cloud was grown in a test tube.

Amazing when a game that has 100+ hours of gameplay can make you want to play more than once.

Re:Short answer... (1)

chrismcdirty (677039) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503477)

That's exactly why I disliked Sephiroth and why he seemed like a caricature. He was pretty much and over-powered superhuman. Plus (if I remember the story correctly) he had a good reason for wanting to destroy the earth. Sometimes I felt sympathetic for him.

Kefka, OTOH, was a seriously messed up human. He was a genocidal maniac who killed for no good reason. I could look at him, and liken him to Hitler or other despotic leaders who use mass murder to rise to and keep their power. But, yeah, he did look like a fruit. Check out the instruction book drawings. He was basically a clown.

Re:Short answer... (1)

hex0016 (758203) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503541)

Check out the instruction book drawings. He was basically a clown.

That's exactly the idea. He's the architypal evil clown: he believes existence is some cosmic joke. And he embraces the chaos. (See The Joker from The Batman comics for another example.)

Re:Short answer... (5, Insightful)

chrismcdirty (677039) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503315)

I completely agree with you that it's in the eye of the beholder. And I do agree FFVII is a great game. But it seems a lot of the people who proclaim FFVII is the greatest game ever are the ones who started playing with FFVII (the Playstation generation of gamers) or haven't played it since it came out. I thought it looked great when it came out. I also thought Chrono Cross looked great. But when I went back to play it a year ago, I realized the frame rates were chopppy and the models were extremely low-res.

Re:Short answer... (1)

creepynut (933825) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503604)

I also thought Chrono Cross looked great. But when I went back to play it a year ago, I realized the frame rates were chopppy and the models were extremely low-res.

You lost me here. Though the framerates weren't stellar, I'm going to have to disagree strongly about the lowres models. Chrono Cross, IMO, has the best graphics of any Playstation game. The movements are so smooth and realistic, and the details are excellent.

But more importantly: why exactly do the frame rates and models have ANY bearing on the game being great or not?

Re:Short answer... (1)

RSquaredW (969317) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503656)

I borrowed a friend's PSone a while back and tried to go through the 'classics' of the PS1 generation (a lot of Square, mostly). Quite frankly, the only game that holds up really well graphically is FF Tactics, which is a sprite-based game. I'd much rather go back and replay FFT or FF6 than 7, 8 or 9, because sprites hold up better over time. Look at the difference between Street Fighter II and Mortal Kombat - people are STILL playing SF2 (c.f. Anniversary Edition), but nobody has bothered to rerelease MK. Both had good fighting systems that were relatively deep, but the cartoony sprites on SF2 hold up a lot better than the pseudorealistic MK sprites.

With sprite graphics, the designer can say "this looks this way because that's how I want it to look", as opposed to polygonal graphics, where there are still jaggies and clipping and clothing issues, despite years and years of work. I get the feeling that this is why there is still a lot of nostalgia for SNES/NES games, and very little for any PS1 game other than FF7.

And just to get marked flamebait, Kefka could whup that whiny Sephiroth any day of the week. After all, it was Kefka who taunted: "You people sound like chapters of a self-help book!"

Re:Short answer... (1)

Rapidflash (966755) | more than 8 years ago | (#15504293)

Look at the difference between Street Fighter II and Mortal Kombat - people are STILL playing SF2 (c.f. Anniversary Edition), but nobody has bothered to rerelease MK.
Actually, Mortal Kombat has been rereleased as part of the Midway Classic series, as well as on cell phones.

Re:Short answer... (1)

Mprx (82435) | more than 8 years ago | (#15504209)

I don't get why so many people criticise CC for low frame rates, when it's usually much higher than all the PSX FF games.

Re:Short answer... (1)

hoggoth (414195) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503721)

> it had a hero battling with himself, discovering the truth about his path and his very existence, his identity. Think "Fight Club" and "Memento."

The main character in Memento never did discover any truth about his self. At least not for longer than ... hey that's pretty...

Re:Short answer... (1)

Fallingcow (213461) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503488)

At least the graphics aren't as bad as in FF8

I swear to god, the text in that game is harder to read than the new font on this site. Makes it unplayable IMO.

How the hell do you screw up text? They'd only been doing just fine with it for the previous 7 games.

Re:Short answer... (2, Insightful)

CashCarSTAR (548853) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503611)

FFVI is really weird.

The first half of the game is great. Terrific. The story moves along, has interesting characters, great scenes. The whole nine yards.

Then the story just falls apart. When the linearity of the game is removed, the writers need to stop character interaction, because you may not actually have a character when you get a different one. As well, you don't actually have a storyline anymore. The game is reduced to a series of individual character scenes.

Re:Short answer... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15504668)

On the contrary, the second half of FF3(6j) is what makes it great.

The character interactions are still there, but they're VERY dependent on who is in your party at a given time. It's conditional. Try it some time. Once you get the second airship, pick up a character somewhere (Locke is an easy choice, as is Mog.) Then go after one of the side quests that affects that character. Then reset (I hope you used an emulator with freeze states) and go do that side quest without that character. There's usually a difference in what is said and done in the side quest.

That effectively takes the game off its rails and makes it (potentially) different every time you play it. And all the while, it doesn't derail the main story. It reflects the destruction, disruption, and chaos that comes about due to the "end of the world" that happens in the middle of the game. It doesn't just give you a bunch of side quests to finish simply to get all the cool stuff/stats for the end of the game(bring back character X, acquire esper Y, find item Z, etc.), but rather it wraps those functional side quest components in personal backstories and even further development of the main plot. Yes, main plot developments in optional side quests. It's kinda like how real life doesn't wait for you to finish something before other things happen.

All this adds up to not only a plot climax, but an emotional peak as well. You see 14 characters' reasons for hating Kefka and doing what they're doing. If you're not totallysuperpissedreadytokickassandremoveheads at Kefka by the end of that game, then you haven't been paying attention. Kefka is the only Final Fantasy evil mastermind that ever made me want to torture, demoralize, and kill him rather than just being happy to rip into him with a sword like a side of beef. Not Chaos, not Zeromus, not Exdeath, certainly not that pansy Sephiroth, nor any of the rest. Only Kefka. The rest are amateurs compared to him. His deathtoll reflects this as well. Chaos killed a few elves. Zeromus waxed a king, some soldiers, a mage or three, etc. Exdeath didn't really do much killing, he was more into enslavement and the sucking-everyone-into-the-void thing. Sephiroth just stood around and looked pretty and tried to wipe out a planet. We'll give him points for trying. But Kefka wiped out entire kingdoms by military (everything around Vector), poison (Doma), and fire (the laser weapon on his tower in the second half). He killed fellow generals and even the emperor. He oversaw labs for weird genetic research on live humans (and espers). He invaded a parallel dimension and killed some of the magical beasts that lived there. He caused a world-ending catastrophe. Then he practically declared himself "god" and maintained a world of chaos. He killed millions.

I just don't see how you can say that isn't a cool game. The mechanics are great, and the story is the best of any FF game.

Re:Short answer... (1)

arodland (127775) | more than 8 years ago | (#15504801)

I definitely had the same thought about the graphics when I picked up VII (which I first played only last year) -- "man, this is so chunky. These guys weren't ready for 3D yet. I'd rather have VI than this crap" -- but it does grow on you. The graphics quality isn't hot, but there's still plenty of artistic merit there. As to the storytelling, I can't pick. I'd say VII is on a par with VI, and they're both excellent. VI has the best soundtrack of the entire series; VII has the second-best. When it comes to gameplay, again, they're both very good, but VII was the first to get a really good start towards truly customizable characters. VI was getting there, with Relics and some interesting character-specific moves, but VII blew the top off with Materia. VII also expanded the depth of "extras" -- hours and hours of completely optional gameplay. So yeah, it still deserves its title of Completely Awesome. Faster hardware and bigger storage have given new games the ability to compete with VII, but I haven't found one that bests it in scope and coolness quite yet.

Re:Short answer... (1)

CableModemSniper (556285) | more than 8 years ago | (#15505631)

Fully customizable characters? Did we miss the whole Job thing in 5? Even 1 let you pick your class.

Re:Short answer... (2, Insightful)

Carnildo (712617) | more than 8 years ago | (#15505518)

Short answer: You can't compare them, except on a superficial level. They're two different genres of game.

Oblivion is a classic "western" RPG: "Here's a world. Go forth and do things."
FFVII is a classic "eastern" RPG: "Here's a story. Go forth and complete it."

FF7 FTW (1)

LiQiuD (571447) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503136)

I actually poped FF7 in the PS/2 last night, and it was still as fun as I remeber it being...that's probably why I have 4 copies of it...the disks keep going bad on me. :)

Resurfacing?! (2, Informative)

TekReggard (552826) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503180)

4 Copies? Get the bad copies resurfaced at a used music store, and sell 'em on ebay or something. They just stopped taking trades on them at GStop / EB, so know in advance that wont work. But seriously, you're sitting on some possible value there.

Re:Resurfacing?! (1)

LiQiuD (571447) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503199)

I actually kind of like seeing the old school 4 disk CDROM cases sitting there on my shelf. It's one of the things i enjoy..i know...kinda sad really...but it's nice to have them all. :)

Re:FF7 FTW (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15504581)

Unlikely.

You either treat your discs badly or your PS/2 is scratching the discs on you. You should really look into a new PS/2 unit now that the prices are dirt cheap on brand new slim models.

FFVII the greatest? Please. (4, Insightful)

AuMatar (183847) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503139)

FFVII isn't even the greatest of the final fantasy games- 4,6, and 9 blow it out of the water.

That said, I'll take even 7 over Oblivion any day- RPGs are about the story to me, and sandbox RPGs have way too weak a story.

Re:FFVII the greatest? Please. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15503253)

There was something about the presentation -- not merely graphical, but more an amalgamation of all of the elements of a good game -- of Final Fantasy VII that I think caused it to be so wildly popular. I like it every bit as much as Final Fantasies IV and VI, I'd say. All three games had great storylines, fantastic music, and were just downright fun to play.

Don't go hatin' on the VII just because everyone and their brother loves it.

Re:FFVII the greatest? Please. (1)

rhfb (980702) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503279)

Agreed. FFVI is actually one of my favorite games.

As for FFVII it was only my third favorite game of the PS1/PS2 era(FFT > FFIX > FFVII), and I have not had the chance to play FFXII yet.

Eh Nine was crap (3, Insightful)

Nazmun (590998) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503348)

The story line in nine was quite weak and I had a hard time getting attached to any of the characters. Plus the character design was weak, the main 16 year old princess looked like she was 9.

The game play was it's redeeming factor but I loved the flexibility of the materia system much more.

Re:Eh Nine was crap (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15503719)

Seconded.

Re:Eh Nine was crap (2, Funny)

Palshife (60519) | more than 8 years ago | (#15504360)

Motion carries. FFIX, you're dead to us.

Re:Eh Nine was crap (4, Insightful)

AuMatar (183847) | more than 8 years ago | (#15504351)

The materia system is one of the things that ruined FF7. It made it so your best melees were just as capable at magic as your worst. This means there was no reason to use most of your characters- just your 3 best at all times. THe inflexibility of FF9 was a strength- it made characters have strengths and weaknesses.

Re:Eh Nine was crap (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 8 years ago | (#15504458)

But... but you got to play as a monkey! And it was not Son Goku! Doesn't that count for ANYTHING?

Re:FFVII the greatest? Please. (1)

Das Modell (969371) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503358)

FFVII isn't even the greatest of the final fantasy games- 4,6, and 9 blow it out of the water.

Maybe in your opinion, but your opinion is not fact. I prefer FF7 over any of the previous games, or FF8, which is the last FF I've played (I don't have a PSX/PS2, see). FF6 was good, but it just didn't really grab me like FF7 did. It's not a question of graphics, because I greatly enjoyed Chrono Trigger when I played it for the first time 4-6 years ago, and it's one of my favorite games. I loved FF7's Materia system, while FFV8's magic system felt so awful that I eventually stopped playing entirely.

Re:FFVII the greatest? Please. (1)

hex0016 (758203) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503490)

Ah, the infamous "Junction" system. That was an exercise in frustration. It took 10 minutes to get your characters set up exactly how you wanted them. There were rewarding aspects (such as making your characters practically invincible against some of the tougher monsters by junctioning the right spells, or doing massive damage by junctioning the right spell to your attacks), but it took me a long time to beat that game because of the frustration. Actually, it took me a long time to beat FF7, but that's only because I kept trying to breed chocobos so I could get Knights of the Round, and annihilate all of the Weapons. I eventually gave up on that project, and just beat the final boss on my first try.

Re:FFVII the greatest? Please. (1)

Onan (25162) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503620)

I think I'm one of about four people in the world, but I actually rather liked the junctioning system. It did feel as if it allowed much more customization of your abilities than, say, the materia system.

My only real objection was that that idea of actually casting any of your spells was ludicrous, since they were so much more effective when just junctioned to your other abilities. It would have been nice to see more balance between those two uses.

Re:FFVII the greatest? Please. (1)

Olix (812847) | more than 8 years ago | (#15504040)

Mmmm. The junction system was great. I remember having 99 Ultimas junctioned to Squall's attack, and 99 of some other big spell attached to his HP. Then I'd just keep him for ever inside the limit break range, owning everything.

IV was the greatest (in the US at least) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15503674)

Final Fantasy IV remains as the greatest Final Fantasy game of all time. Actually, I don't know, V might have been better, but the rereleased versions on the PSX are unplayable due to loading time. So I've never played V.

So here are why FFVI-XII suck:

VI: Strong opening - until you get far enough to get Espers, then all the characters sort of meld into one super-mage. Story starts strong, but just sort of stops at the end. Great opening but incredibly lousy ending just kill this game. Especially combined with the combat system bugs - including the crash bug when Relm used her special ability.

VII: All the characters might as well be the same. Materia means you level up abilities and not characters, making having more than three characters in the game pointless. The story is just plain stupid, involving something about destroying the planet to become all-powerful (and then what?!). Only game I know of that had an Invincible status effect, allowing your characters to become completely invincible.

VIII: Junction system sucked. Your best bet was to NOT level up, since monsters leveled up with you. Get to level 40-ish, stop leveling, and junction magic correctly, and your characters might as well be invincible. Limit system was just stupid - spam Triangle until you randomly got a limit. (Yes, it was randomly decided when your character was selected.)

IX: Abilities were gained off your weapons. Yes, really. Because of this, abilities were essentially gained linearly with no real choices. You had to "learn" abilities by weilding a weapon long enough.

X: Blitzball. One character's weapon was a doll. Another used a beach ball. Your characters start off distinct, but it doesn't matter, because you can swap any character into battle at any time, so choosing your party is a complete non-issue. Once you get far enough in the advancement system, all your charcters quite literally merge into one super-character. Ultimate weapons would "break damage limit", allowing the final boss to be killed in two attacks.

XI: Better known as "Final Farming XI", "Final Fantasy: Crab Hunter". Take a Final Fantasy game. Remove the story. Remove the minigames. Leave in farming for rare items, and nothing else. Enough said.

XII: Characters play by AI. Enough said.

IV (or maybe V) was the last great Final Fantasy. It's just gone down-hill since then.

Re:IV was the greatest (in the US at least) (1)

Nightspirit (846159) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503870)

Heh, I would say IV was the best. It had the perfect mix of grinding and cutscenes. Everything over that was way too overboard with cutscenes.

Re:FFVII the greatest? Please. (2, Interesting)

Programmer_In_Traini (566499) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503790)

Hum yes, Its not fair for Oblivion to compare it to FF4-5-6-7-9 because they're just all better in my opinion.

But lets not mix apples and oranges. FF & Oblivion are not the same type of RPGs. They're both beautiful games (in terms of graphical eye candy - for when their time anyway).

Oblivion is more about freedom, exploration and interactivity while FF is more about your classical RPG where the hero saves the princess from the raging dragon.

But i have to admit that square enyx has done a good job at disapointing me with some of their latest installments, notably, FFVIII and FFX (and x-2) I havent played the online game and not quite looking forward to play FFXII, because they've become shallow - compared to my beloved 4-5-6-7-9 whose story was quite compelling.

Errr... Not a fair fight. (4, Insightful)

GundamFan (848341) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503183)

Nostalgia makes everything old seem good. FFVII was a great game (perhaps the greatest) in it's time but any flaws it did have fade from our collective minds over time. I say the video game press should let people keep there fuzzy memories and stop this endless stream of lists of top games and apple orange caparisons between the modern popular games and the classics. If this is the only way to fill the pages of a gaming mag (or blog or site) that should tell us something.

Re:Errr... Not a fair fight. (1)

Das Modell (969371) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503282)

It's not nostalgia. FFVII was and is an absolutely brilliant game, and I think the last time I played it was a year ago. I'd choose it over Oblivion, any day of the week.

Re:Errr... Not a fair fight. (1)

GundamFan (848341) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503421)

Don't get me wrong I am not passing judgement here... it is all about your taste really, I tend to prefer games like Oblivion to games like FFVII but it is not comparing apples to apples.

Plus why exactly do we care about a reporters opinion or the outcome of a poll? It won't lessen you love of Final Fantasy style RPGs or my love of Elder Scroll style RPGs.

Re:Errr... Not a fair fight. (1)

rmadmin (532701) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503374)

Screw you hippies! FinalFantasy on NES FOREVER! :) I still play it on my EMU, among other games. Most of which are way more entertaining that todays PS2 releases (for me atleast). Plus they don't cost me $20-50/game.

Re:Errr... Not a fair fight. (1)

GundamFan (848341) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503466)

Good for you... high end PC gameing is highly over rated anyway... so long as you respect my decision to waste perfectly good money on Hardware to play the new stuff. :)

Re:Errr... Not a fair fight. (1)

rmadmin (532701) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503836)

More high end hardware for you then! I can play about any game I'm interested in playing on my athlon 800. :P

Re:Errr... Not a fair fight. (1)

supersocialist (884820) | more than 8 years ago | (#15504158)

You're joking, right? All that painful monster grinding ... FF2j is better: the "levelling" is actually much harder, but you can game the experience system fairly easily and just enjoy the story.

The main reason I prefer the NES Final Fantasy games is that my Treo can emulate an NES, but a PSX? Doubtful.

Re:Errr... Not a fair fight. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15504060)

Final Fantasy being the best RPG?? Apparently these kids never got the chance to play Wasteland, THE best RPG ever (the Fallout games were based on it). Coming in a close second and third are Ultima IV and V.

Sure they had archaic graphics, but very few games of today sport the depth and gameplay of those legends.

KOTOR (4, Interesting)

RonnyJ (651856) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503187)

Personally, I think SW:KOTOR is the best PC (and Xbox) RPG in the last few years. Oblivion had such an open world, but just about everything was linear in it - dialog choice was pretty much fixed, and about the only player choice was whether to sneak or not for each quest. With KOTOR, there was multiple choices for practically every quest, with the 'light-side/dark-side' system. Sure, it wasn't perfect, but it certainly made it more entertaining and gave the game more replay value.

Re:KOTOR (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15504111)

KOTOR, Planescape and the Baldurs Gate games beat both Oblivion and the FF games hands-down.

Re:KOTOR (1)

Phaxn (946939) | more than 8 years ago | (#15504640)

I do agree KOTOR is a great game, but i think the main reason everyone really likes it is because it came out in a dry period for RPG's and it didn't hurt that it was Star Wars.

Re:KOTOR (1)

WindozeSux (857211) | more than 8 years ago | (#15504848)

And nothing was linear in KotOR?

KotOR is extremely linear with a such a low amount of replay value.
Really, which is better, a game with no replay value that collects dust after you beat it, or a game that's open-ended and has a construction set.

I still liked it for the story though.

Re:KOTOR (1)

dbug78 (151961) | more than 8 years ago | (#15505013)

KOTOR I & II were excellent games that I would recommend to nearly anyone... and I say this as someone who often gets bored with RPGs, AND as someone who absolutely hates Star Wars. I loved both of these games in spite of that.

Heh (2, Interesting)

aftk2 (556992) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503201)

If you took someone new to gaming, and said, "tell me what an RPG is," and gave them Oblivion and and FF7 as examples, I doubt they would really be able to complete the task. Seriously - Japanese RPGs and CPRGs (I guess, for lack of a better term) are so different there really isn't any utility in classifying them in the same way. Don't get me wrong, I like them both (haven't played Oblivion yet - really liked Morrowind, in spite of its weak main story - and I loved FF6) but such a comparison just seems to me like a way to either drum up page hits or start a fanboy war.

Re:Heh (2, Insightful)

Fallingcow (213461) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503637)

Oblivion could be called a Role Playing Game. At least, it allows for and arguably encourages that kind of gameplay.

Final Fantasy games are adventure games with a leveling system, just like Deus Ex is an FPS with a leveling system.

You don't "role play" in either of those games, any more than you do in a conventional adventure game or FPS.

It doesn't mean that any of the games is better than the others necessarily, I just think it's silly to automatically label anything with a leveling system and involving some kind of magic a "Role Playing Game".

The "JRPG" genre is really the Text Adventure genre with graphics and leveling.

What is the point? (5, Insightful)

Suddenly_Dead (656421) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503217)

They're pretty dissimiliar games. Final Fantasy 7 is pretty linear, has turn-based combat and a more traditional leveling system. Oblivion is mostly non-linear, has real-time psuedo-FPS style combat, and has a less traditional skill based leveling system. Comparing the two is almost like comparing Command and Conquer to Civilization because "they're both strategy games".

No, I havn't RTFA, and don't intend to.

Writing a article and being on /. (1)

doudou42 (691076) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503268)

You are absolutly right.

The question is how to be sure to be on /. ?
Just put two big names in the title of your article and publish on the net.
Whatever the content, you'll be there :)

Where is the point ? (2, Insightful)

doudou42 (691076) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503226)

The article is not a real comparison between two completly different games but about why the author prefer a game more than the other...
IMHO, the whole article is biased, just take a look at the screenshots, do you see any of Oblivion ?

For me, a really interesting article would have been build around the differences between eastern RPGs and western RPGs. Trying to analyse the reason why each genre is fun in its own way, trying to improve them in mixing concepts but still respecting the specificities...

On FF series... (1)

DarthChris (960471) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503230)

FTFS: ...Final Fantasy VII is held in the minds of many gamers as the best RPG of all time.

It's interesting how many people say this, then loads of people say "No, I preferred this one". I've only completed 7 & 8 myself, and I'm not sure which one I like more - though they both get a bit silly towards the end.

Re:On FF series... (1)

bahwi (43111) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503333)

Exactly why I was never able to finish it. I can't decide, which is the worst FF I've ever played, 7 with Cloud, or 10 with Football. I think FF1(US) was the best. Plain, simple, and didn't force you into BS. Oblivion is good, very sandbox though, but enjoyable. You can stop the main storyline and go have fun. In FF7 you have to continue, or go fight, there's little else to do.

And what is the japanese obsession with Fishing and pointless mini games? Is it only brilliant US developers who thought up the idea of many many side-quests and mini-quests, instead of a completely different(ridiculously) boring game within the game? Oh yeah, FF7 had the arcade, at least that was a couple things, but really bad still.

Mind you, all the FF games have a high standing on my list. The new dragonquest that came out was so silly, that I could see no storyline. They say oblivion has a weak main storyline, well, play dragon quest, it's so silly you'll never notice a storyline. =)

But, to each their own.

Re:On FF series... (1)

flooey (695860) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503368)

It's interesting how many people say this, then loads of people say "No, I preferred this one". I've only completed 7 & 8 myself, and I'm not sure which one I like more - though they both get a bit silly towards the end.

FFVII is actually my favorite RPG (calling it "the best" I think is a little much), so it's true for some people. Personally, I thought FFVIII was awful. The game itself was alright, but I hated Squall. I kept playing the game and going, "Why am I still playing, Squall is the one I want to lose."

Re:On FF series... (1)

scolby (838499) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503439)

Now that you mention it, it seems ALL the modern ones get a bit silly toward the end. Seven, eight, nine, ten, ten-two...none of them had an end that even remotely paid off the promise of the beginning, which is a bit disappointing. Hopefully Square got their act together for twelve.

What? (2, Interesting)

th1ckasabr1ck (752151) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503239)

What kind of article is that? All it does is talk some general stuff about nostalgia and then compare graphics and how FF7 is linear and Oblivion isn't.

I enjoyed both games, but non-linear games don't really do it for me. First of all, I don't have time to put a million hours into a single game when there are so many out there to play. That's why I decided to give up MMOGs completely - or if I try one I only play the trial month and then quit (as I did with World of Warcraft and Everquest 2).

Also I just personally prefer linear games over non-linear ones - especially when it's an RPG and the story is the reason that I'm playing. Everything can be so much tighter and efficient in a game that has you follow the story closely.

For the record, I liked FF7 more than FF6 but not as much as FF9.

Re:What? (1)

WWWWolf (2428) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503599)

Just because the game is open-ended doesn't mean it can have a story that you can follow through and through without engaging all those small side tracks.

Take Ultima VII, for example - it has a reasonably long main story, and you can spend quite a time to get that done, and it's quite possible to finish the game without doing any of the subquests. But it's also open-ended; you can literally go wander around and literally live in the world (make money by engaging in honest jobs, and pay for food), explore every nook and cranny of the world at your whim (as long as you figure out how to get past the various obstacles, if not other way, there's always a ton of powder kegs =), and engage in the ton of small quests.

Re:What? (1)

Zed2K (313037) | more than 8 years ago | (#15504207)

I feel the same way about linear vs non-linear but Oblivion isn't that free form. Sure you can put off the main quest as long as you want, but at the same time the directions to finish quests makes it extremely easy to stay on track and not have a lot of just wandering around looking for that one thing to do.

Re:What? (1)

garylian (870843) | more than 8 years ago | (#15505191)

I agree that linear is more fun than the non-linear or open ended games.

I loved NWN, and am eagerly looking forward to NWN2. I loved the origina Ultimas, I-III, and the original Wizardry. The original Bards Tale (and Bards Tale II) were simply fantastic stories. Even the original Might & Magic games were brilliant in scope.

FF7? Maybe one of the best console RPGs, but it can't compare to those early PC games.

And as far as bugs went, they didn't really have any. You couldn't really patch back in those days, where as with today's game, they use buggy code as a method of copy protection. Leave a horrible bug in, and the player can't play the game until they patch, which fixes the copy protection that came with the game. Pretty simple and effective. Makes pirating games into spending a lot of time to download a broken demo.

WTF? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15503288)

Who actually thinks FF7 is the greatest RPG? They should be ridiculed and laughed at, publicly.

Update the graphics? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15503290)

If FFVII were to be completely overhauled with graphics like in Advent Children, I would buy it all over again.

I have recently gone back and started playing all the Final Fantasy games. I can't say for sure which one is my absolute favorite, but they all have one thing in common, lasting value.

Both Suck (0, Troll)

Dorceon (928997) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503317)

Give me a Namco RPG any day. Or something new from the team behind Skies of Arcadia. Hell, if you must stick to Squenix, why not compare to Chrono Trigger? You can tell FF6 didn't have any replay value because I lent my copy to someone, finally got it back after a year, my save (near the end, but still unbeaten) had been deleted, and I felt no urge to start over. I played a little FF7, but I realized I was playing to see FMVs which weren't very good and stopped. Didn't even get as far as Aeris dying. Good thing I was just borrowing the Playstation.

Spoiler Alert! (1)

pete_m78 (777512) | more than 8 years ago | (#15504716)

Didn't even get as far as Aeris dying.
Yeah, thanks for the spoiler alert mate.

Well it's subjective (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503353)

But I doubt the majority of longtime gamers would defend FFVII. Personally, I do think it's the best RPG I've ever played. I personally liked the story, however immature it might be. The graphics were good enough to let you know what was going on, so I'd say they're adequate but not inspiring, even then. The game had some minor flaws, but in general was quite slick, and it just had a certain level of depth that you don't tend to see. But then, I haven't played oblivion yet - my budget doesn't include new games, only used.

Bah... Fallout 2 is the best RPG of all time. (2, Insightful)

vertinox (846076) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503380)

Oblivion nor FFVII can hold a candle to FO2.

Although, I get teary eyed everytime I want FF:Advent Children mostly over Aeris's death. I think that is the only game that has ever made me cried.

For some reason FFVII made me very emotional throughout the game, but I don't know if it was because I was young or if it was the first game to do that.

Re:Bah... Fallout 2 is the best RPG of all time. (1)

Fallingcow (213461) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503724)

I'm gonna have to agree with you.

"Temple of Trials" BS at the beginning aside, that game was great.

The character creation/leveling system was awesome, ALL of the storylines (main quest- and side quest-related) were terrific, interesting and immersive world, good/fun battle system, and, most importantly, *multiple endings*. Not just for the main quest, but with variations created by *every* major side quest. Somehow manage to not find a certain town during the whole game? No mention of that town at the end. Fail to fix a major problem in another town? That town declines and maybe dies. Work for one person over another? The one that you worked for becomes dominant.

EXCELLENT.

Citizen Kane comparison... (2, Interesting)

thebdj (768618) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503419)

it should be noted that the same people who say Citizen Kane is the best movie ever are the same people who say it is the most overrated movie ever. And before you ask here is one source [bbc.co.uk] .

So, it wouldn't be outside the realm of possibility for FF7 to be the same way, afterall when something is hyped up so much, it is bound to be viewed down a bit too...

FF vs. OB, fuggedaboudit... (1)

hrrY (954980) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503542)

Pick the correct sarcastic, metaphorical comparison. The choice's are: (a) -- "Trying to compare a city block to an interstate highway..." (b) -- "1ft to 1 mile" (c) -- "The high school geek to elderly scholar" (d) -- "A kitchen sink to a backyard inground pool" (e) -- "A sandbox to a beach" 1st prize is this lovely kenmore washer and dryer!

Materia (1)

ScislaC (827506) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503546)

I have to say that one of the things that makes FFVII rank so highly for me is the "Materia" system. In my opinion it made for a very interesting way for equipping whatever ability you want to whatever character, as well as the nice aspect of all kinds of combinations.

Materia is the worst part of FFVII (1)

BlackCobra43 (596714) | more than 8 years ago | (#15504715)

Seriously, to hell with that system. It breaks down all characters to what Materia they have equipped; there is no character variety. All of them have similar statistics, weaponry and armors (I'm aware of the slight differences, but they don't provide any actual variety). The only thing setting them apart is their Limit Breaks..and even then..

What ever happened to good old classes? Or what about (in my mind) the greatest ability system of all, the Job systems present in FFV and FFT?

Best RPG? Nah, A widely accepted cult classic. (5, Insightful)

Vistaer (978511) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503635)

Final Fantasy wasn't the greatest RPG per se. Most RPG fans will say there are other games which stand out far more such as Final Fantasy VI, Chrono Trigger, Ultima VII, or Fallout. It was simply an RPG that for some strange reason was loved by so many, even those who hate RPGs in general. I would say that its the same thing as what happened with World of Warcraft. Most expected WoW to be a success, but it's instead been a monumental achievement the likes of which investors dream of when they invest in a company.

I wouldn't call FF7 the Citizen Kane of RPGs or games, but rather I'd call it the Star Wars of the gaming industry. Noone I think really expected it to explode into the success that it was and reach such a larger audiance (I dont think anyone who had a PS1 didnt have FF7). On top of that, like star wars it seems each recent sequel can't find the same place in people's hearts that FF7 found. It was strange indeed, but I think its success can largely be attributed to many little things. Things ranging from marketing and publicity down to the twists in the story and Characters in game (Sephiroth is still by far one of the greatest villains ever). I can still remember working on leveling my characters up all day just so I could beat the Ultima creature.

As far as keeping it fresh and would FF7 still stack up today? No... I don't think so. Unfortunatly games have made moves in recent years that are so major it can't be helped but not feel impressed by games like FF7. Sure FF7 will always carry the nostalgia love with it, and while its story and characters are still top notch, you cant help notice some things that have been improved on since (graphics aside) and perhaps wish that PS3 tech demo at E3 was actually being made into a FF7 remake =)

Re:Best RPG? Nah, A widely accepted cult classic. (1)

Gnostic Ronin (980129) | more than 8 years ago | (#15505466)

I think FF7 is overrated. It's not bad, but it isn't a great game. It's pretty mediocre IMO. First, Materia is seriously flawed. It made every character identical except for "limit breaks". If you couldn't play with Cloud for a time, no problem. Just put all Cloud's materia on Tifa, and other than the limit break, you'll never notice the difference. At least link the character's ability to use a spell that they never used before to a stat, or maybe to how often they use materia period. The storyline is uneven. up until you leave Midgar, yeah, it's a pretty good story. But after that, it goes downhill like an out-of-control bobsled. For the next 4-5 hours, all you do is chase Sephoroth. Chase Sephiroth to the coast of Junon. Chase him across the ocean. Chase him to the Temple. Chase him, chase him, chase him. Other than Aeris dying, the next big event is the Huge Materia Quest, and the Weapon attacks. Aeris' death might be surprising, but it wasn't all that well done. I never really cared about her. There didn't seem to be much personality to Aeris at all. Barret dying would have made more impact, or maybe Tifa. I actually like Suikoden III and V better than FF7.

Let us not forget. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15503697)

"Final Fantasy VII is held in the minds of many gamers as the best RPG of all time"

It is a truism that, wherever two or more CRPG players are gathered together, eventually one of them will name Planescape: Torment as the greatest CRPG of all time. Then the others immediately agree.

At least, round my way. I've even heard things like:

"[Game X] is the best CRPG I've played. [beat] Except for Torment."

Narrow and sharp wide and fuzzy (1)

spyrochaete (707033) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503729)

I think, to grossly generalize, linear games will be looked upon more favourably in the future than open-ended games. Linear games have a narrow, well defined goal. Open-ended games strive to do things a little better than the last open-ended game. For instance, I can't even play Vice City anymore now that I've played San Andreas.

Oblivion is definitely an evolution in some aspects over Morrowind in some aspects, but some features are a step down (the made-for-TV interface is worthless on a PC monitor and mouse) and the fundamentals haven't changed one iota since Dragon Warrior for the NES (and are a huge step down compated to some of the Ultimas).

That being said, for some reason I'll always look back fondly at the Ultima Underworld series. However, the crazy mouse-only control scheme is really obnoxious in the WASD generation.

So I vote for FFVII in terms of longevity. Then again, Oblivion bored me to tears before long (granted, pretty long - 50 hours).

http://demodulated.blogspot.com/2006/04/elder-scro lls-oblivious.html [blogspot.com] - my various bitches about why Oblivion felt dated the day it was launched

Re:Narrow and sharp wide and fuzzy (2)

Fallingcow (213461) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503928)

Oblivion bored me to tears before long (granted, pretty long - 50 hours).

Haha, same thing's happening here. I've put in ~50 hours doing most of the town-related sidequests, all of the Dark Brotherhood quests (best so far, definately), and I'm working my way through what appears to be the only other set of interesting guild quests (Mage's guild). I've also progressed maybe 25%-30% of the way through the main storyline (though with a character that I've stopped using because he sucked).

I'm getting REALLY bored with this game. I don't even think that mods can save it at this point, and I doubt I'll ever play it again once I stop. I'm seriously considering just finishing the Mage's Guild quests and then using the cheat that zaps your character to the next quest location to finish the main quest quickly and get all of the story, as Oblivion gates are damn dull places, and it's not like I need to level up any to finish the game, as it all levels with you anyway.

Compare this with Morrowind. I played the main game at least 150 hours, and probably closer to 200, with and without mods, over several different sessions sometimes separated by months. I played through both major quests in the Bloodmoon expansion TWICE each, at least another 50 hours there, and another 30-40 spent going through the Tribunal expansion. Probably the most time that I've ever devoted to any game.

If they'd release that exact same game again with Oblivion graphics and a few of the updated gameplay features (like time schedules for NPCs and the plant harvesting method, and the new face creation system is nice), I'd re-buy it at $50 and very likely sink another 100+ hours in to the damn thing.

Re:Narrow and sharp wide and fuzzy (1)

spyrochaete (707033) | more than 8 years ago | (#15504281)

The stupid Oblivion gates are one of the main reasons why I hate this game! You have to close how many of them? Like 15? And they're all pretty much identical! I can only kill those whirly stone guys and spider chicks and sword douches so many times (3 - that's how many gates I put up with) until I get bored.

And I found the main story really weak and uninteresting. Saving whatshisname from the burning city was the dumbest crap I'd ever seen in a game. Our 15 escorts in plate mail all got killed, but the NPC in a bath robe just got knocked unconscious over and over and over!! And he was as dumb as a post too! As my archer I'd sneak up slowly and stealthily on a group of enemies, waiting to get a 3x damage shot from the shadows, when the NPC would charge with his stick into a group of 10 demons, get knocked unconscious, and then all the demons would charge straight for me!

If only they'd kept Patrick Stewart for more of the game I'd at least have his UGLY UGLY character to look forward to. But this big budget game couldn't afford more than 3 lines from him, so my only motivation to play is to escort these morons VERY SLOWLY to some mountains. I got bored of waiting for them so I ran ahead, thinking they'd catch up. When they didn't show up after 10 minutes I backtracked (on foot because the horses are completely useless) until I found them standing still. One guy's horse was stuck between a hill and a tree, and the other horses were stuck as well, anally pleasuring the first guy's horse with their snouts! So I walked up to them one by one and pushed their horses sideways by walking into them until they got unstuck.

That's as far as I got in the game. I did zillions of side quests, but it was totally pointless. Enemies got stronger as I did so leveling up actually hurts you. Bandits would threaten my life if I didn't give them 100 gold, but I'd kill them and sell their $20,000 armour. Basically I felt like my 50 hours was completely wasted, except for the time I spent appreciating the sometimes perfect lip syncing.

Re:Narrow and sharp wide and fuzzy (1)

Fallingcow (213461) | more than 8 years ago | (#15504659)

But this big budget game couldn't afford more than 3 lines from him, so my only motivation to play is to escort these morons VERY SLOWLY to some mountains.

You know that you can fast-travel with companions, right? Do lots of minor side quests and exploring so you find (as in actually go to, not just get the map markers) almost every major place on the map (or at least enough places so that you can get NEAR anything that you can't fast-travel to directly) and THEN do the guild quests and main quest.

It's what I did with the second character that I made (an archer. My first character was a ranger-ish dude but he was getting too many gimp levels and I was falling behind my enemies at an alarming rate, my third one is an attempt at a mage with some of the leveling/major skills suggestions from GameFaqs incorporated, but it's SO boring to play that way.)

I think that I did 3 or 4 gates with my first character before abandoning him. I'll probably cheat my way through ALL of them as they come up, when I take another stab at the main quest. They are boring as hell. The exterior environments are reasonably varied and kind of interesting, but once you're in the main tower (I.E. over half of the time for each gate) it's a snooze-fest.

I also think that they may have made a mistake in making the bows so powerful (as in, as powerful as they SHOULD be, proportional to the other weapons) in this game. It is BY FAR easiest to play as a ranged-emphasis character. The only things that are even a little bit hard for ranged characters are escort missions (as you mentioned, and anyway, mages have the same problems on these, if not more so because their ranged spells travel so slowly) and the Arena fights. Everything else is a snap. My archer rarely got hit at all.

Archer is the most fun, though, because with these great graphics and the way the bow works in Oblivion (as opposed to how it worked in Morrowind), I can pretend that I'm playing Thief 3 again :)

Sad when that's the greatest feeling I get from this game, huh? The momentary sensation that I'm playing another game entirely?

Re:Narrow and sharp wide and fuzzy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15505388)

My problem with 'sandbox' games is that I waste a lot of time wandering around just trying to figure out what the hell I am supposed to be doing. Give me a clear goal and some clues as to how to attain it.

This is a joke, right? (1)

popeguilty (961923) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503926)

Fallout, Arcanum, KOTOR, Deus Ex, Earthbound...

I'm sorry, Final Fantasy who?

Console RPG (2, Insightful)

Dolly_Llama (267016) | more than 8 years ago | (#15503999)

While Oblivion is touted as the latest and greatest PC-based RPG, Final Fantasy VII is held in the minds of many gamers as the best RPG of all time.


Console RPG, yes. There's no clear winner in PC RPGs with contenders like Planescape:Torment, Fallout, and Ultima IV.

Now this is spin at its best/worsed (5, Insightful)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 8 years ago | (#15504038)

The problem is that the reviewer ain't comparing FF7 with Oblivion at all. He just critizes Oblivion to make FF7 look good.

If we assume for a moment this guy ain't a shill then all he is showing that he prefers adventures over RPG's.

The simple fact is that the western RPG ala Baldur's Gate is a totally different genre then the japanese "RPG" ala the Final Fantasy series. The biggest single difference is that you do NOT have a choice in the japanese "RPG". Why do I use quotes? Because I am a westerner and as such think that RPG's originate with the D&D Pen & Paper style games. These games were not just about fighting and levelling up or being told a story. They were about making choices. The dungeon master would tell you the situation and then the game starts with, what do you do.

The western computer RPG usually tries to give you choice, choice as to what you play, choice as to how you play and choice as to well what choices you make. There are costs involved. The non-choice character Planescape Torment gives you a far stronger story then say Icewind Dale where you create your own party. Yet PT is as free as a bird compared to the on-rails gameplay of Final Fantasy.

If anything the Japanese "RPG" in western eyes is closer to an adventure with stat based fighting. Adventures are great games but usually not known for their free form story telling. Linear is the word most often used. I amazed to see games like Fire Emblem labelled as an RPG. Exactly where is the RP element?

You therefore in my eyes can't compare the Final Fantasy with Oblivion (although Oblivion does suffer from a lot of linear quests) because fundementally they belong in different genre's.

To me, a western CRPG lover Final Fantasy doesn't count as a great RPG, a mediocre RPG or even a bad RPG. I don't count it as an RPG. Doesn't mean it is a bad game. It just ain't a RPG.

I am not totally alone although I realize it is hard to come up with enough labels to eh label all the various game genre's. Lets just settle for Japanese RPG and Western RPG. Most people here would know what is meant by that including that comparing games between the two is futile.

This reviewer probably hasn't learned that distinction and was either burned by Oblivion thinking that ALL RPG's are like Japanese RPG's. Either that or he is an idiot.

As for this being posted by Zonk, well big supirse there.

Re:Now this is spin at its best/worsed (1)

Yosho (135835) | more than 8 years ago | (#15504405)

Just because a game doesn't let you make many significant choices doesn't mean it's not a role-playing game. It's entirely possible to play a role without making choices -- look at centuries of theatre, for example. Plays have a set script, and actors are expected to go through the motions and read their lines. The play will turn out basically the same every time, but nobody would argue that the actors aren't playing roles. One could argue that they do make choices -- they can move differently, put different inflections in their voices, dress differently, etc., but you have the same degree of freedom in games like FFVII; you can walk in any direction you want, customize your characters' equipment and abilities, pick dialogue options that provoke different responses from NPCs, and so forth.

Besides, it's not like Oblivion really gives you much more freedom -- no matter what you do, the main plot line always turns out exactly the same. You can murder people left and right, and you'll still be praised as a hero in the end. There are no real consequences in the game, other than the fact that you'll eventually run out of NPCs to murder.

What you want is a choice-making game, not an RPG.

By your definition all games with a character are (1)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 8 years ago | (#15504936)

By your definition all games with a character are roleplaying games. In thief I roleplay a thief. In quake I roleplay a marine. In tetris I roleplay a block stacker.

Your comparison to theater is neither here nor there. This is not what is meant by roleplaying. That is why we don't call actors roleplayers and acting not roleplaying. Yes they play a role but they are not roleplaying. I would think that on slashdot the distinction would be clear. You are probably one of the washed hordes who never played a D&D like game.

You are right about Oblivion not giving you a lot of choice. Oblivion ain't the greatest RPG ever in my book. 99% of its quests are stricltly linear and there are very few consequences to your actions with you being able to both be an assansin and a knight in shining armour with no problem. A more true RPG would let you be one or the other but not both.

Sadly there are few enough game genre labels. Perhaps Oblivion would be better called a stat based, non-class-restricted quest exploration game. Or something.

you and me disagree 100% on this. What you want is a choice-making game, not an RPG. No, in my eyes an RPG is a choice making game. Do I join the thiefs guild or the band of paladins, do I save the child or hand it over to the slavers. Am I evil incarnate, look out for number one or so good halos shoot out of my ass?

The simplest test of an RPG is this, can you choose to be evil or good? You can't in any Final Fantasy game I played. Therefore it is not an RPG by western standards.

But hey, this is a well known holy war. To you playing a role is being the pre-defined character, to me roleplaying is making my own choices in a game. Western RPG vs Japanese RPG.

Re:By your definition all games with a character a (1)

Yosho (135835) | more than 8 years ago | (#15505637)

I am not saying that playing a role is being a pre-defined character. I'm saying that playing a role is playing a role. You're trying to define role-playing as a situation where, not only do you play a role, but you have free reign over the morality of that role. That's a subset of the set that the term "role-playing game" defines. Yes, if you interpret it loosely enough, you can consider almost any game a RPG. That doesn't mean that you should restrict the term so tightly that only the sub-genre you approve of can be called "RPGs"; that just means that when you use the term "RPG" to describe a game, you should be more specific if you don't want people to misinterpret what you're saying.

And please, don't insult me baselessly. I play D&D weekly, and I've been playing it since shortly after 2nd Ed., Revised was released.

Most games are RPGs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15505020)

Just because a game doesn't let you make many significant choices doesn't mean it's not a role-playing game. It's entirely possible to play a role without making choices -- look at centuries of theatre, for example. Plays have a set script, and actors are expected to go through the motions and read their lines. The play will turn out basically the same every time, but nobody would argue that the actors aren't playing roles. One could argue that they do make choices -- they can move differently, put different inflections in their voices, dress differently, etc., but you have the same degree of freedom in games like FFVII;

That analogy is bad.

This reasoning applies to ALL action/adventure games. If an RPG is simply a game where you are loosely playing the role of a character (no choices involved), then what makes FF different than MGS? I mean, in MGS, instead of sparing knocking out people, you could kill each one you meet. Instead of sneaking, you can run out guns ablazin'. You can customize your look a little bit. And it fits your definition of role-playing.

Or, even more focused, what makes Super Mario Bros different than Super Mario RPG? Same story, same character, both highly revered, but one games's an RPG and the other's not.

The "role-playing" aspect in Japanese RPGs is insignificant. It all comes down to making choices via menus and leveling up.

You want a menu-based adventure game, not an RPG.

"Japanese" vs "American" RPGs (1)

Prien715 (251944) | more than 8 years ago | (#15504689)

I suppose it depends on what one defines as "role playing". In the D&D sense, it means making your own "role" which isn't so much role playing it can be argued as "role making" while in a more structured environment, your role is given and you must "play your role" to complete the game.

The best analogy I can give is Classical vs Jazz. While there's room for some variation in Mozart (dynamics, articulation, tempo, and cadenzas) it's not like a Duke Ellington chart where what's written is almost a suggestion -- the further one strays from the written path as it were, the more "Jazzy" it is. It's not to say that either aren't "music played by a trumpet". It's also not to say there's not intersect.

FF6, for example, 1/2 the game is the Balder's Gate style "collect your party and use who you want" but with a better interface and a much more flexible skill system than any computerized D&D system.

Wholeheartedly agree. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15504749)

The "term" RPG has taken a rather unfortunate turn to simply meaning "menu-based gameplay." You could take something like Pacman, stick menus in it such as:

-Eat pellet
-Eat Power Pellet
-Flee
-Magic ...and suddenly, it's an RPG. By that logic, every action and/or adventure ever made is a real-time RPG.

ROLE-PLAYING Games. It's right there in the title of the genre.

Difference (2, Insightful)

Drakin020 (980931) | more than 8 years ago | (#15504100)

Final Fantasy has more of a fixed story line. No matter which way you go your allways on the side of good. Oblivion is more open ended. You have the choice to kill whoever and whatever you want. There is also much more room for customizing character development in oblivion. They are on 2 different levels of gaming I would say.

If I could get a copy of it, I'd play it again (1)

porkchop_d_clown (39923) | more than 8 years ago | (#15504329)

it's amazing, but copies of FFVII go for 80-100 USD these days...

Xenogears (1)

Bleeblah (602029) | more than 8 years ago | (#15504389)

Thank you, that is all.

Re:Xenogears (1)

JonLatane (750195) | more than 8 years ago | (#15504889)

Praise the Ethos.

Poor comparison.... (2, Insightful)

JayDot (920899) | more than 8 years ago | (#15504919)

For starters, I never owned a console system until the now-deader-then-a-doorknob Dreamcast, and my enjoyment of RPG games didn't start until many years later. That being said, I think it's a poor comparison to take a game from (almost) 2 console generations ago and compare it to a recent PC release. Almost everthing is different: controller vs keyboard/mouse, linear story vs non-linear, gameplay style, and timeframe. Using an old game vs a new one only allows the older players to make an informed comparison. Everyone else (especially including myself), gets left out, so to speak.

Looking Back.... (1)

DavidD_CA (750156) | more than 8 years ago | (#15505147)

I still hold that of all the games, 7 has managed to tug my emotions the best which is probably why I rank 7 at the top of the FF list. Not for its graphics, or even play control, but the plot and character development and music. When I hear Aerith's theme playing, I can vividly remember the scene in which she dies. No other track from any game does that for me.

In looking back at older FF games (which I recently did one weekend) I basically concluded that graphics *do* make-up a lot of the replayability of the game. It was almost painful to play FF7 again because of the early 3D polygons, despite how much I loved the game when it came out. Even 8 and 9 look bad compared to 10, as we would expect.

If 7 were released again but with modern graphics (as seen in Advent Children), I feel it would easily show just how great 7 really was, smacking down 9 or 10 or KH or Oblivion or whatever else is currently on the market.

Tell me your age... (3, Insightful)

fujiman (912957) | more than 8 years ago | (#15505509)

... and I'll guess at your favorite game.

Every gamer has a momemt, sort of like losing your gamer cherry. You never forget the first time a game moves you to tears, makes you laugh out loud, or scares you so much you have to turn on the lights and turn off the computer.

I didn't get FFVII, but I was 30 at the time. I had already played Ultima Underworld, Lots of Wizardry, and more traditional CRPGs. I'm sure if I was 13 and I had a Playstation, things would be very different.

I don't begrudge anyone their favorite game. I think it's great that people are passionate about it, and want to share the experience with others.

For the record, my "first game" was Ultima Underworld II. There's a portion of the game where you need to raid the tomb of a king, and his ghostly court tried very hard to stop you. When you reach the king, you realize they weren't trying to stop you from stealing his treasure, but were trying to keep you from letting him realize he was dead. At that moment, I had a feeling that I had done something very wrong... much worse than just stealing a trinket.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>