I am getting the urge to finally complete (maybe perfect) some of the older FF games (1-5 and maybe 6), and I know by now probably all of them have had portable remakes. Having played the originals already, do you folks think it's worth trying out the newer versions, or just stick to the classic retro versions? On paper, the remakes should be the way to go, but I just get this feeling that they will be completely weird to play, not to mention losing some of the aesthetic that made the originals so charming ("These are pirates for chrissakes!"). However, new side-dungeons, no save bugs, more efficient menus and all that stuff sounds appealing.
Let me know what you think
>>2812347
I hate jrpg, that's what I think
Go with your feelings. Just play whatever you want. The joy of gaming comes from discovering things on your own.
>>2812353
Thanks SO much for that update you little faggot. Why don't you go fuck off back to /v/ with that already?
>>2812347
There was a general for this shit. Delete this thread you ass-hat
>>2812371
Are you Yoda or something? Just give a fucking rec, or shut STFU. What you posted is totally worthless. It's like someone asking you what your favorite brand of pickles are, and you're like "just eat the ones that taste best to you..." It's moronic and you should fucking feel bad for contributing nothing at all to even this, a fucking WORTHLESS topic.
>>2812381
Haha your virulent hate made me laugh. Thanks m8
>>2812347
I'd play the originals. I feel like you'll enjoy them more.
Play remakes for 1, 2, 3, 4
Play SNES 5/6
>>2812347
>I am getting the urge to finally complete (maybe perfect) some of the older FF games (1-5 and maybe 6), and I know by now probably all of them have had portable remakes. Having played the originals already, do you folks think it's worth trying out the newer versions, or just stick to the classic retro versions? On paper, the remakes should be the way to go, but I just get this feeling that they will be completely weird to play, not to mention losing some of the aesthetic that made the originals so charming ("These are pirates for chrissakes!"). However, new side-dungeons, no save bugs, more efficient menus and all that stuff sounds appealing.
>
>Let me know what you think
I'm doing the exact same thing - playing through all the Final Fantasy games - but I'm doing it through the GBA ports. Just too many graphical/mechanical/additions not too. In my humble opinion.
>>2812381
hey dude r u feelin okay???
>>2812347
like with any series, I think it's important to start at the beginning, with the original versions. Not that you have to play them all the way through. some of them are a little difficult to enjoy, if you are used to the features of modern games. but, you should play a few hours, or as much as you like, to get a feel for the original vision of the creators. This will help you appreciate later innovations and understand how the series, as a whole, has developed.
as for the most enjoyable experience, I think remakes are fine. the developers tried pretty hard to bring those old FFs forward without losing the elements that made them great. I love the IOS/Android releases. since all of them from the first to VI have been released on mobile, its a great way to play them all, without having to scrounge up multiple systems and copies of the games. I mean, I know some people revere the GBA FFVI release, but the screen on that thing is crap. It may be the best release, but I am perfectly happy with the hi-res IOS port. You might prefer the original SNES on a real television. Experiment, and see what you like
>>2812347
>not to mention losing some of the aesthetic that made the originals so charming
I think you know in your heart that the remakes are worthless shit not worth gazing upon. And similar to the chap who posted before me is saying: you'll understand their place in history better if you actually play the versions that helped shape the genre.
Play the originals and enjoy your party of red haired pixel men.
>>2812347
We get this question literally weekly which is why people are salty with you. But whatever, here's an actual serious reply for you.
The main difference besides graphics in FF 1-3 in the remakes is time. Leveling and money gain takes less time in them, which some see as making them easier. In my opinion other than 2 they're all pretty easy, it's just the time commitment if you want to grind at certain spots. 2 in the remakes is quite a bit easier, but the basic structure of how you level is the same.
IV, V and VI there's not a ton of difference. The original release of IV was the easy version, so it's actually faster than the DS remake.
With VI which version you want usually comes down to the translation. They're all about equal in my opinion but some people have very strong feelings one way or the other.
The last thing to note is unless you're emulating them, avoid the PS1 releases of IV, V and VI because they weren't optimized for the system well at all and full of slowdown and bugs to the point they're almost unplayable. Some people report running an ISO of the games in an emulator works pretty well though.
>>2812347
If you ask me, FF1 doesn't have a good version to pick from.
The original FF1 has some stupid bugs when it comes to stats and critical hits, it isn't a well balanced game difficulty wise. The inventory system isn't convenient. I really don't like how the choices you have for picking classes and spells can be dumb when many choices are just terrible and you wouldn't realize it. I never see people complain about spellcasting equipment, but to me using equipment as free spellcasting items feels weird in this particular game. The way it is presented makes you think the game treats it as some tiny extra thing but it legitimately takes over the game at some point replacing a good chunk of your normal actions.
The original FF1 is the one that most retro enthusiasts prefer though. I can see why and respect it, but if you weren't inoculated at an early age to its flaws you might not be able appreciate it.
On the other hand the GBA version fixes all of these flaws but the difficulty slider went too far into the other direction. They also modernized the MP system, which is a regrettable loss of FF1's unique system. It looks really nice though, it just sometimes feels like you maybe aren't playing the real version.
The PS1 version is basically the NES version. I remember that it does have some improvements and of course a nice graphical upgrade, but most of the flaws are shared.
>>2813452
>They also modernized the MP system, which is a regrettable loss of FF1's unique system.
Is it really a loss? D&D ditched in the end for the system for the same reason FF did. It doesn't really make a ton of sense and doesn't add anything good to gameplay other than artificially forcing you to use shitty spells sometimes.
I agree with you that there's no really good version of FFI though. It was neat for it's time but is ultimately a really uninteresting game.
Depends on the game.
For 1 there are a billion versions, it's tough but I'd say play the psp one.
For 3 its a choice between either ds or nes, I'd say go for the ds, it's good despite being drastically different.
For 4-6 play the gba versions, same games with quality of life changes and extra content
2 is garbage, don't play it.
>>2813620
>2 is garbage, don't play it.
lol baby opinions persist. FFII is a very different game from the typical JRPG but is an excellent game if you don't cheat the system and break it. It's not for people who just want to mash attack in every random battle to win a game though, which it's sad to say is a fair number of JRPG players.
Also the GBA port of VI is awful. Graphics are washed out and weird looking and the music was butchered to fit the GBA's terrible sound chip. IV and V are pretty bad too, but VI suffers the worst.
>>2813761
I've only played II once and that was on Dawn of Souls when it came out. Recently started playing it again, but on Origins and holy shit it's amazing (so far). About to blow up the Dreadnaught right now. The whole game is pretty immersive with what the NPCs say (e.g. in regards to a characters death or a kidnapping), the towns after ruin, and even the side-characters. Gordon is a great example of not only reflecting how shitty the three characters were at the beginning of the game where Minwu had to baby-sit, but also a reflection of how strong the three characters grow as he grows within his own Castle walls. Motherfucker steps up just as much as Edward does in IV.
Gonna play III soon. I'm trying to avoid the DS/PC/PSP port of it. Anyone recommend a good translation for the NES original?I've never played III ever
>>2813761
There is nothing wrong with being different or trying some new mechanic, but 2 tried and failed. It's ok, it happens. Doesn't make the combat good or deep though.
>>2813864
But it didn't fail at all. It was picked up by the FF Legend series which went on to spawn the SaGa games which have a small but devoted following.
Also you're wrong on it not making the combat deep. The biggest problem with Final Fantasy combat and JRPGs in general is that in 90% of every random encounter you come to, the most practical option is just to have everyone in your party attack, even mages. The result being that the gameplay is very shallow and ultimately boring. Combat becomes a grind of simply doing the same thing over and over until you get to a boss and hope the fight will be a little more interesting.
In Final Fantasy II on the other hand, having your whole party just blindly attack for 90% of the game is a terrible idea. In order to play well you need to make your whole party act according to the kind of character you want to level them into. If you want a mage, then you have to spend the bulk of that character's actions building they're spells and magic power. If you want someone to be good with swords, you have them use swords a lot and so forth.
It's not a perfect system, and would go on to get improved on a lot, but it's surprisingly deep and works very well if you play with it. However, for people who just want to push A to get through a game and see it's story, FF II is not the game at all for them.
>>2813856
I also really like how you have to learn key words to ask people about. Just talk to someone randomly and they'll say one thing, ask them about the Dreadnaught though and get something completely different.
II feels so strangely ahead of it's time.
I see a lot of people dismiss the 8-bit FF3 and I feel that is mostly because we never got a proper port of this game in the west, only the remake. But I would recommend playing the original FF3 with a translation patch. This game originates many things which became standards of the series. Moogles, chocobos, summons, and many other FF tropes originated in this game and it is cool to see how they were first introduced. Its worth playing if you are a fan of the series because I feel it was more influential on later games than 1 or 2.
>>2813864
The combat was almost unchanged from Final Fantasy I outside of being able to target anyone with your actions. Its character growth system is radically different though.
>>2812347
As far as V and VI, it works like this:
>V for the most part is a straight upgrade, except for mobile who's only fault is that the new graphics look like utter shit.
>VI on the other hand didn't fair so well. Get Ted Woolsey Uncensored or FFVI Relocalized, the added postgame isn't worth it and mobile managed to be way more shit than V.
With IV it's purely by preference as each version is straight different instead of an upgrade.
>>2813452
Referring to FF1, the GBA version is fine. Purists will choose the original anyway, and if you just want the story, backbround and experience, GBA version takes some weight off your shoulders. The spell charge system is absolutely dull, it's not even "an interesting feature gone wrong".
>>2813934
He never said it was?
>>2813452
If you ask me, FF6 doesn't have a good version to pick from.
The original FF6 has some stupid bugs when it comes to stats and critical hits, it isn't a well balanced game difficulty wise. The inventory system isn't convenient. I really don't like how the choices you have for picking espers and spells can be dumb when many choices are just terrible and you wouldn't realize it. I never see people complain about Vanish/Doom, but to me using Vanish as free almost auto-kill feels weird in this particular game. The way it is presented makes you think the game treats it as something that shouldn't even happen but it legitimately takes over the game at some point replacing a good chunk of your normal actions.
The original FF6 is the one that most retro enthusiasts prefer though. I can see why and respect it, but if you weren't inoculated at an early age to its flaws you might not be able appreciate it.
On the other hand the GBA version fixes all of these flaws but the difficulty slider went too far into the other direction. They also modernized the script, which is a regrettable loss of FF6's unique charm. It looks really nice though, it just sometimes feels like you maybe aren't playing the real version.
The PS1 version is basically the SNES version. I remember that it does have some improvements and of course a nice bestiary, but most of the flaws are shared.
>>2814096
I laughed at this way harder than I should've.
>>2812347
In general what I've notice from /vr/ on FF are two things:
>Squeenix remakes eventually turn to absolute horseshit, unless they happen to be Dragon Quest
>People will argue with you to the ends of the earth about their favorite version of their favorite number of FF
In the end, look at them all and see which one sounds like the best version.
>>2814096
Is this purely a joke post or do you have advice for FF6? I was under the impression there wasn't a huge difference in the remake like the earlier titles. Aside from the "obvious differences" in (technical fidelity, translation script, fixed bugs, extra content) did the remake really make it easier? If I haven't played any version, is it still going to be too easy?
>>2814151
Mostly a joke post, but a lot feel that FFVI has no definitive version without hacking.
The VI ports look the same on the surface but the major part was a fuckton of bugfixes (like them or not, vanilla is a contender for buggiest FF alongside 1). This is good. However they were hit the worst by far by the sound/color "reassignment" for GBA, and the mobile port has really awkward problems compared to V (UI is kind of weird, the resolution is somehow smaller, DRM, larger file size, stranger mishmash of updated and original graphics, etc) even though it reintroduced the original music.
As for the postgame, unlike IV GBA/PSP and V's ports it's nothing to really write home about. Sure the Leviathan esper is cool and a new +speed one is nice, but the new dungeon is a fucking grind and a half.
>>2814172
Don't forget that GBA specifically also censored a scene slightly in all languages, though the event was restored by patch. Along with the color and most of the sound problem.I hear an update is being worked on with the sound patch.
Still not as terrible as mobile though.
>>2813934
Not saying its better but it is a different game. My point is that part of the appeal of FF3, for me, is seeing the true origin of many things which we now associate with FF. You don't get to really see that in its original form with the remake.
>>2813905
Chocobos started in FFII. There's a forest near that one castle where Leon and blah blah blah. IIRC, as it's entirely unnecessary, it's also entirely missable.
>>2815384
The Chocobo song is so irritating though in FFII since it's only the A part of the Chocobo song used in later games repeated over and over and over... it gets really grating.
>>2814087
He was recommending it over the remake though...
>>2814846
That's fair. I was asking because I played the remake and really enjoyed it. I've thought about going back and playing the original, but I've never liked the old FF sprites and look. So I was wondering if there was much difference between them otherwise.
>>2814192
Not to mention summons and bosses
>>2815582
I wouldn't play any of them having taste that shitty
>>2815589
My personal aesthetic preferences don't align perfectly with yours so my taste is shitty? Are you 13 or something?
Sorry, but in terms of good 8-bit art, the original FF sprites have never appealed to me a ton. It didn't stop me from playing and enjoying Final Fantasy back in the NES day, but I never considered it a great looking game and hold no nostalgia for the sprites.
The DS remake was pretty good and though I don't love the aesthetics, I like them better than the NES. However, I don't dislike the NES graphics enough that if the original game was much different or more interesting in some ways (like the versions of FFII) then I'd be willing to give it a go.
>>2812584
Just make sure to use the sound patches because GBA sound is awful.
VI is imo the best one to begin with if you like story and characters, People say the same about IV, but it didn't click with me as well as VI did and the character growth system is the simplest in the series. V is the best one if you like mechanics and classes, and IX is the best one if you like graphics and characters I guess.
I'd never recommend starting with 1-3 but mostly because they don't mesh as well with most people's tastes, they're less accessible.
>>2815618
Nothing about nostalgia there's more detail to the art done on the snes than badly drawn Korean outsourced sprites
>>2815623
I think for people who liked V, they'll also like III.
II is very divisive and is worth trying, but is very much a love or hate experience.
IV is basically a beginner's RPG. Everything is very straight forward and your party is always perfectly set up for what you need in the game. It can make it boring for people who are into the more mechanical aspects of the games, but can be good for someone just wanting to get into the genre.
FF1 is an interesting game, but really hasn't aged well and isn't very interesting from either a gameplay or story perspective.
>>2815627
>more detail to the art done on the snes
>badly drawn Korean outsourced sprites
What are you talking about???
I was talking about Final Fantasy III, which was an NES, not SNES game. And it's remake which was 3D, no Korean sprites. Though that bit of racism was a nice touch.
>>2813897
No other FF did something like that did it?
>>2813905
Is there only one translation patch?
>>2814172
Wait, the mobile ports of FF games have content the GBA/PSP versions don't have? Or did I read your post wrong?
>>2815632
>IV is basically a beginner's RPG.
Considering that it was the first main FF on the SNES and would most likely have brought a lot of new players to the series that makes sense.
>>2815712
That's how it was designed. As a much more streamlined game that would appeal to a broader audience. Particularly in Japan where visual novels are a much more popular genre.
Compared to the first three games, IV strips out virtually all the decision making and strategy, giving you the exact right classes and spells at the right times. It's designed so you almost can't fuck it up.
As a result, FF IV became one of the most popular games ever made in Japan.
>>2812347
SNES Style FF13 when?
>>2816582
Try Record Keeper, closest you'll get.
>>2816582
It would be even less fun.
Imagine Dragon Quest 1 going in a straight line with no need to grind.
>>2815705
V-VI do. IV is the DS release which is a whole different deal.
IV is weird, no two kinds are completely alike.
