I have an urge to replay the older Final Fantasy games. Problem is, there are so many remakes/remasters that I wouldn't know which to go with.
So when should I play the original and when should I play a remake? And which remakes give the best experience?
>>3304987
The Playstation versions (origins) are straight up remakes (except whiffing might be removed, I don't remember). All other versions change the gameplay.
So if you want the original experience play the NES originals or the Playstation version if you like the 16bit graphics.
Are you a purist or do you just want to get the gist of them?
Purist mode is playing the NES or Famicom original (with translation patch is fine) and going from there. Having played them all they're all fine, but they're old and kind of grindy, and FF1 has some big bugs but nothing game breaking afaik. Just some magics don't work and other mechanics.
FF Origins on PS1 was simplistic and the difficulty was toned way down. There were probably other changes but I can't remember. I enjoyed the PSP versions of 1 and 2 that you posted, so if you can play that it's worth it. Chaos was actually buffed by a lot and I found him very hard, whereas in the NES he was a pusscake. Plus I think all remakes have some bonus dungeons. But none of them seem to be very grindy and feel a lot shorter because of it. Obviously all got new translations too.
One thing to note with FF3 is because it was 3D they reduced the number of enemies per battle so the DS could handle it. That means they buffed each one so you take more damage per hit which throws off some of the jobs. You basically need a healer at all times to cover the extra damage. I don't remember it being like that in the NES version, since there would be more enemies, but they were weaker and spread the hits out among your whole party.
>>3304987
Playstation or Wonderswan is your best bet for a more original experience. The GBA and PSP versions use MP instead of vancian casting which makes it far easier.
>>3304987
A grand list for you.
>FFI
Just play the NES one, it's perfectly playable, and all of the other ones just do things to mess up the game's balance.
>FFII
GBA version, or whichever one is latest, they can only fix that game more really.
>FFIII
NES, DS and later is actually harder and kind of dumb with how they messed up the balance
>FFIV
Play the PS1 translation to get the closest to SFC aesthetic and difficulty without using a translation patch
>FFV
GBA all he way
>FFVI
SNES version is fine.
Literally ignore FF1, FF2 and FF3 in any form
The FF4 PSP remake is where you should start
>>3305038
>it's perfectly playable
If you ignore the fact that several stats and spells have literally zero function.
>>3305068
If you're talking about Intelligence there is literally nothing in the code that ever showed it was supposed to do anything. The spell bugs suck, but it's not that big of a deal for the game.
We have this thread every week, and it always turns into a shitfest over a specific anon's preference for the GBA or PSP versions. I'm not even going to bother to breakdown all the version differences since it's just going to be more troll food, but I'll nonetheless encourage OP to look into the PS1 remakes and ports. These are the most accurate to the original versions while making some improvements, like fixing bugs and reverting censorship / localization changes. Later versions progressively become more casualized or are just poor quality overall.
>>3304997
>FF Origins on PS1 was simplistic and the difficulty was toned way down
What? No way. The only thing made easier was that if your character targets an empty space they simply attack another enemy instead of whiffing.
You must be thinking of the gameboy advance or psp versions. You can save anywhere in the psp version.
>>3305197
It has everything else, including the 6 mind flayer instant gameover encounters.
>>3305197
The PS1 had an extra easy mode and extra save options compared to the WSC.
>>3305040
Literally summer cancer.
FF1 and 3 are great.
>>3305210
FF1 is trash
FF3 is less so trash but it's still trash
None of the early FF's aged well. I'd say just play Chrono Trigger but that triggers the FFcucks
>>3305213
Ah the aged poorly meme. Great talking with you champ, I'm out.
>>3305210
>>3305209
Extra save options but not save anywhere.
As for easy mode, just don't select that desu lad.
>>3305243
>implying summer break doesn't give people who already shitpost here much more time to shitpost.
>implying the wave of stupidity absolutely HAS to come from new users.
>>3305213
If they're trash why are they both some of the better games in the series?
>>3305456
>FF3
>better than anything
>let alone better than games from the same franchise
I wish I was as deluded as you.
>>3305275
Yeah, IIRC it was just a "bookmark" feature that let you continue where you left off. It wasn't a quicksave. The same thing would be accomplished by just leaving your console on.
>>3305197
The PS1 version of FF1 just pisses me off in general.
It's like they upped the encounter rates but made the battles too easy, so you just end up mashing A the whole time.
>>3305802
>It's like they upped the encounter rates but made the battles too easy
I'm thinking the encounter rate is identical, or at least similar. The fact that you can now dash with the B button might make encounters seem more frequent, especially in dungeons. I know the GBA version increased the encounter rate though. Quite a bit.
As for being too easy: It's mostly identical to the NES version, except with bug fixes. This means INT now influences spell effects, which means White and Black Mages are more powerful. With the INT bug, all mages would cast spells with the same proficiency, since healing / damage formula didn't scale with the character's INT or experience level.
Elemental properties on weapons were fixed as well. This means they'll actually deal additional damage to certain enemy types. The properties were never applied in the NES version.
Here's /vg/'s Final Fantasy General's Pastebin on the matter.
http://pastebin.com/nDC7j5bn
>>3305858
Yeah, it seems like the dash button DOES increase encounter rates in every FF remake.
Anyways, I really want to like FF2, I really do, but that dungeon design is designed to make me hate it.
>>3305243
>that much
It still implies it does increase some, which proves the picture accurate.
>>3306104
Dash button doesn't increase the encounter rate, it just makes them happen faster. Since there will be a set # of steps until the next encounter, dashing means you cover those steps in less time, giving the illusion of an increased encounter rate.
>>3304987
>So when should I play the original and when should I play a remake?
FF has no shared universe outside of sequel games. Play them however you wish.
>And which remakes give the best experience?
Either play the NES patched with Restoration (and probably the original font patch), PS1 if you don't really think the NES graphics are for you, or PSP if you really can't stand the magic charge system, enjoy extra dungeons, and think Normal difficulty's going to be too hard for you (Squeenix got rid of Normal and defaulted to Easy at GBA onwards).
>>3305038
>GBA for V
>SNES for VI
Why SNES for VI if V is your preference for GBA? Just curious, it sounds odd unless you're playing something like Ted Woolsey Uncensored or Relocalization Project.
>>3306509
>FF2 is awesome
it would honestly be great if the game didn't try to make you go fucking mad
unless you really like dungeons with doors that lead to completely empty rooms you have to walk out of and chests at the end of long hallways that just give you 1 gil
