Talk:Final Fantasy/archive 4

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Merchandise

There is a large market for FF merchandise, yet its not mentioned here at all.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.71.137.127 (talk) 20:22, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

You're definitely right. Please add a Merchandise section, thanks. Kariteh 20:54, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Limit break merger

The limit break article is interesting in the context of the Final Fantasy series, but is probably not ever going to stand on it's own, so I propose it be merged here. Judgesurreal777 21:46, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

I would strongly argue against the merger. This article is already too long, and trying to stuff more into it would result in a mess, IMHO. I should point out that the same tag has been added to Final Fantasy Magic. IMHO, both tags are inappropriate. The arguments expressed in the magic article was that it was unsourced, which (again, IMHO) has nothing to do with notability. If it is going to be merged into something, I would recommend the magic article. wrp103 (Bill Pringle) (Talk) 00:44, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
I think it should be merged, but not here. It would be better to be merged into Common themes of Final Fantasy as a section under "Gameplay Elements". --—ΔαίδαλοςΣΣ 08:40, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
(pasted from FF magic talkpage) A few months ago, we started a sandbox of a gameplay of Final Fantasy article, User:Deckiller/Gameplay of Final Fantasy, which will bring together the Final Fantasy items, Limit Break, elements from the main article, Final Fantasy magic, and overviews of other articles. It's been put on the backburner temporarily. — Deckiller 01:14, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
I also think that merger would be a mistake. Both of these articles are long and merging them together would create an article that is far too long. – Lilwik 07:03, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
The Limit Break article appears long only because it's full of pure fancruft and game guide details. Wikipedia is not a game guide. We don't need to say that performing a limit eight times will grant you the level 2 limit, or that you learn Seraph Strike when your club skill reach 40... If reduced to actually interesting and notable information, the Limit Break article would definitely be short enough to be merged in Final Fantasy (series) or Gameplay of Final Fantasy. Kariteh 09:43, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
It must be shortened for a merger GreaterWikiholic 04:13, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
It appears consensus is against the merger, perhaps we should bring it up again when we are ready to create Gameplay of Final Fantasy. Judgesurreal777 19:19, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

More sources

I removed {{More sources}} because it is asking for more sources. There are three references given and 20 notes. It seems to be adequate to me, espeically comparing it to a number of other articles on Wikipedia. It would be better to use {{fact}} to talk about which specific points need to cited rather then just tagging the entire article. If fact, when using tags, there ought to be something addressed in the talk page by the person placing the tage, but there isn't any that I have seen. --Pinkkeith 21:00, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I take it back, it is mentioned here: Talk:Final_Fantasy/archive_3#Citations.2C_Take_Two --Pinkkeith 21:11, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

RPGe nominated for deletion

the people who first translated final fantasy v are being nominated for deletion. this is insane. voice your opinion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RPGe 209.209.214.5 05:54, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

source for this info

"According to unconfirmed sources, Sakaguchi had plans to retire after the completion of the project, so it was named Final Fantasy.[citation needed]" I remember watching an interview with Hironobu Sakaguchi as a part of a documentary titled "Final Fantasy: The Past, The Present, The Future". He revealed the reason why the series was named "Final Fantasy". The statement above is completely correct. I'm just not sure how to add a source.. Someone please? Aurora sword 04:27, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Use this template: Template:Cite video Kariteh 08:06, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

U.S. Original Release Order

A presumably new editor (Special:Contributions/69.152.113.102) added a list of U.S. release dates, which was reverted by User:Kariteh. I added a welcome message to the anon talk page, encouraged them to create an account, and to start a topic on this talk page about the addition. When they did instead was add the list again, which was reverted again, followed by a v4 tag, which I believe was too harsh (WP:DBN).

The original justification for the revert was that this isn't an American version of Wikipedia. That is true, but it is an English Language version, and release dates for English language versions of FF seems appropriate. I believe that this information should be added, but differently than it was. In particular, I think we should have a table that lists, in order of release, the release date, both the Japanese & English numbers (e.g., II/IV) and the platform, along with the name of any compilation (e.g., "FF Origins"). This should include the re-releases as well, such as the recent PSP and DS versions.

Any comments? -- wrp103 (Bill Pringle) (Talk) 14:10, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Only if PAL region releases are included too. And still, there's already a long and almost-complete List of Final Fantasy media, so this table may be redundant. Kariteh 17:27, 10 September 2007 (UTC)


I'm the one that posted the U.S. release order. I didn't mean to repost it, I just thought I had forgotten to save it(didn't see the message). Sorry if I caused any trouble, I was just trying to add something that I thought needed addition. The area is slightly biased because it has the timeline on FF release dates, but those are only the Japanese release dates (well, technically "first" release dates). I see the List of Final Fantasy media , which is very similar, but I think this sort of thing warrants its own condensed section ( or something :) )on the "main" page. Eagle5000 20:33, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
It's not really biased since these are the original release dates, not some particular local release dates (like the US ones). If more dates have to be added, then both North American and PAL region dates should be added, or it would really be biased. Kariteh 21:52, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Capitalization

I'm sure many here know that FINAL FANTASY is official displayed in all capital letters, and only for sake of space does the American fanbase typically lowercase the non-initial letters. However, since this is a project aiming for a comprehensive, end-all source of information, I suggest that we at least capitalize the first instance on the title, the bolded words at the beginning of this (and, hopefully, all other FF) articles, as well as any external links that retain capitalization in their headings. T.J. Fuller, Jr. 07:31, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

The Japanese always capitalize words written in Western alphabet. This detail isn't specific to Final Fantasy. See also WP:MOS-JA#Capitalization of words in Roman script. Also the American fanbase is not the world; they lowercase in other western lands like Europe and co. too. Kariteh 09:11, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Main games

Someone explain to me how the barely-readable paragraph jumble for the "Main games" section is better than my previous edit, a comprehensive and succint bullet-pointed list. SimBen 06:29, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

One of the reasons is to maintain consistency of prose throughout the entire article. If not, we would have ended up repeating the List of Final Fantasy media. — Blue。 06:45, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
That and lists are generally frowned upon on GA and FA articles, which is where I'm sure some editors would like to see this go. I'll admit it is not the easiest to read paragraph and am open to suggestions on how to improve it. Any thoughts? (Guyinblack25 talk 13:07, 4 October 2007 (UTC))
Something like the Zelda article would work, maybe adding a short descriptive paragraph for each game in the main series while still listing them as bullet points? SimBen 13:58, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

The Legend of Zelda (series), which is a good article, lists its games. The Prince of Darkness 14:43, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I guess it wouldn't hurt to try it; given the number of games, a paragraph format is a bit difficult to read. Though I don't think it should include the numerous platforms and release dates like the Zelda one. That's what the separate game articles and FF media list are for. (Guyinblack25 talk 14:09, 5 October 2007 (UTC))
Ok, it's been switched to a list. Could someone more familiar with the series add some more content to the descriptions like significant changes and additions to the series? (Guyinblack25 talk 14:47, 5 October 2007 (UTC))
I'm not convinced X-2 belongs in the "main series" section. It's really more of a spin-off; if you're gonna start including sequels to Roman numerals, Dirge of Cerberus, Crisis Core, Revenant Wings, Versus XIII and the FFXI expansions would also fit the criteria. SimBen 17:44, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Fair enough. I'll integrated it into the "Spin-off" section. Also, what should be done about the anime and CG films? (Guyinblack25 talk 17:50, 5 October 2007 (UTC))
Either put them in spin-offs or make a new "Non-videogame" subsection. You might just wanna link to the List of FF Media, though. SimBen 18:01, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I am in the opinion that this is much better:

a.k.a. a prose list. — Blue。 20:50, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I was thinking that too, but wasn't sure because of the lack of content. That does look better though; I'll change it to that way. And to anyone familiar with the series, they still need some extra info. (Guyinblack25 talk 21:46, 5 October 2007 (UTC))

Rewrite

Hey, after going over the article, here are some ideas I think could help get this article to GA and maybe to FA. Hopefully some editors more knowledgeable about the series can assist with some of this.

  • Expand the lead
  • Expand of the information in the "Main games" section.
  • Added citations throughout most of the article - mainly the "Overview" and "Music" sections
  • I think the "Music" section could use a rewrite and sources, mainly because some of it sounds like original research.
  • Fill in the "Merchandise and other media" section

With a little work, I think this could easily make it to GA pretty soon. Any thoughts? (Guyinblack25 talk 22:28, 5 October 2007 (UTC))

Thanks for all your hard work. The article looks much improved. I took a first pass editing the music section to cut down on the amount of content, considering that this article is long and there is already an article for FF music. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nimrand (talk • contribs) 01:40, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
What about moving the music section under development? If graphics and technology go under that heading it would seem music should too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nimrand (talk • contribs) 02:39, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
I guess it depends on the information that will be in the "Music" section. If it's a simple description of the type of music, I think it can stay where it is. If it will focus more on the development of the music, then yeah it probably should be moved. Right now it looks pretty like a simple description, but it may change as we go. (Guyinblack25 talk 05:19, 8 October 2007 (UTC))

Getting to GA

There are a few relatively quick things that I think can be done to get this article ready for GA. They are mainly reiterations of the list above, but these are the ones I feel are most pressing for GA.

  1. References for the "Music" section; thanks Nimrand, it looks much better now and is only lacking sources.
  2. Expand the main paragraph to the "Merchandise and other media" section.
  3. Have a fresh pair of eyes do some copy editing.

Any help with these would appreciated. There is currently a backlog of nominees at the WP:GAN so, there's no real rush. But the sooner we get it to GA, the sooner we can get it to FA. (Guyinblack25 talk 20:11, 8 October 2007 (UTC))

I just got done reading through the reception section. Its pretty good overall. We could probably use more content for criticism of the series, so that it doesn't come off biased or too much like an advertisement. Also, we have five different "top games" lists where Final Fantasy has appeared mentioned at the end of the first paragraph in the section. I think it would be better to pick the two most notable "top games" lists, and remove the other three from the paragraph.Nimrand 01:11, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Sounds like a plan. Which lists do you think are the most notable? (Guyinblack25 talk 01:38, 9 October 2007 (UTC))
I edited the mentioning of the lists to be more concise. I haven't had a chance to look for more criticism yet; I'll try to do that sometime this week.
Quick question, does it look like it could pass GA right now? (Guyinblack25 talk 15:52, 10 October 2007 (UTC))

I definitely think so. Well done, Guyinblack25! The Prince of Darkness 18:47, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Anybody feel like nominating it. I've already got an article nominated there and I believe Wikipedia discourages multiple nominations from a single editor. (Guyinblack25 talk 14:18, 11 October 2007 (UTC))
I'd like to. But, from what I've read from the process, it requires some committment of time from the nominator, and I don't have that right now. Maybe in a week or two. If someone else can in the meantime, please do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nimrand (talk • contribs) 18:22, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Whoever nominates, I'll be around to help address any issues. So if you don't have time to it's no biggie. Plus if anyone is unfamiliar with the GAN process this could be an opportunity to get accustomed to it. (Guyinblack25 talk 18:32, 12 October 2007 (UTC))

Just a thought I'd like to throw out, should the "Reception" section be below the "Merchandise and other media" section? My reasoning is to introduce the video game series, then the related media, and end with the reception of everything together. Any thoughts? (Guyinblack25 talk 21:16, 9 October 2007 (UTC))

Sounds reasonable to me. -- wrp103 (Bill Pringle) (Talk) 21:55, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Disambig?

I'd like to see some disambig in the title. It doesn't matter to me if the original FF gets the main title or not, but I think that they're both too well-known to just give to one. - A Link to the Past (talk) 04:32, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

There is already a disambig page: Final Fantasy (disambiguation). IMHO, this article has definitely served as the main root to other FF titles, and deserve the main title. IDK if there's a discussion already. — Blue。 05:01, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
The most recent discussion is at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Final Fantasy/archive/25#Title of FF series article (again). Anomie 11:47, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Well, if there's a consensus against making this a disambig, then I suppose I won't complain about it being a GA with the title it has. - A Link to the Past (talk) 03:15, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Battle System

Although it may seem that I am splitting hairs unnecessarily, the "Battle System" section says that "...and then finally by Real Time Battle systems starting with Final Fantasy XI." This implies that XII has a Real Time Battle system, which it does not. It uses the "Active Dimension Battle" system which, although it can play as if it is real time, it is really just the "old" ATB battle system with the ability to move characters, gambits, and a couple of other minor tweaks. In short, I'd like to change that part of that paragraph, and I will do such unless somebody opposes (or if somebody else changes it). --ThisistheHenry 04:30, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

What did you have in mind? You're right after looking at it again, it does seem a little off. I'm not sure what to do for it though. Any other thoughts on the rest of the article? (Guyinblack25 talk 13:50, 6 October 2007 (UTC))

Games section

Have you thought about turning this part into a table? See Fire Emblem for an example. Thanks. Ashnard Talk Contribs 16:05, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

The thought did cross my mind, but personally I think that tables for video games series often look cluttered. I think that could be a detractor at FAC. The best tables I've seen were on the List of Final Fantasy media, but the spacing is more list friendly rather than article friendly. We tried a mix of the manga and video game tables in the List of Kingdom Hearts media#Video games section, but adding in a image kinda threw things off a bit. I kinda like the current format, but think additional content about the individual games is needed. What does everyone else think? (Guyinblack25 talk 16:54, 16 October 2007 (UTC))

Game screens

Something that just occurred to me. We have two screen shots of battle screens. Sorry to say this, but should we maybe switch out the first screen shot from FFII/FFIV with a screen shot of a world or field screen? Here are some possible images already used in other FF articles. Image:FFIV overworld map.PNG, Image:FFVIIfieldmapexample.JPG, Image:Ffxfieldmapexample.jpg, and Image:FFVIIInavigation.JPG. Just a thought. (Guyinblack25 talk 23:54, 21 October 2007 (UTC))

GA on Hold

Ok, this is a great series article so far, but there are some issues:

  • Lead- this is kinda awkward, specifically "The series has met with positive sales figures and has received an overall positive reception. In addition, it is well known for its visuals, music, innovation, and use of technology. Many Final Fantasy titles have received positive receptions and met with commercial success." How can a series sell less than 0 games? And you repeat yourself again.
  • Game Screens- entirely unsourced.
  • Images all images need specific fair use rational to the page(s) they are on.

When you fix these issues, leave me a note. David Fuchs (talk) 20:12, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Conceivably, it could for some reason (probably tax) to pay others to take the games off their hands.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 05:10, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Images have been individually "fair-use rationalized" bu User:Guyinblack25, except for the Final Fantasy logo. — Blue。 17:00, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Looking better, but the 'game screens' section is entirely unsourced still. David Fuchs (talk) 23:01, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
We'll see what we can do. (Guyinblack25 talk 05:48, 3 November 2007 (UTC))
One has the caption "ripped from a ROM", that's enough. Another one's history states a change to "PC Version screenshot", so I presume it was a capture, as well as the other one by the same user. I thought about asking this user about the pics, but I didn't try because he hasn't edited since August... igordebraga ≠ 12:24, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
I think you're misunderstanding me. I'm not talking about the pictures- I'm talking about the content. David Fuchs (talk) 15:37, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
The lead has been further tweaked and a few citations have been added to the "Gameplay" section of the article. More are being sought. (Guyinblack25 talk 18:32, 6 November 2007 (UTC))
  • Article could also stand for a light copy-edit. — Deckiller 05:49, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
The article has been copy edited and additional citations have been added to the "Game screens" section. (Guyinblack25 talk 21:39, 7 November 2007 (UTC))

3rd Party

Was Final Fantasy always 3rd Party to Nintendo, or did it originally start for Nintendo, and move on later? If the latter is the answer, shouldn't there be a mention in the article over why they became 3rd Party? (assuming anyone knows) Poke DP 10:37, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Square was always third party. They just developed for the Nintendo platform. They switched to Sony when Nintendo refused to add a CD drive. -- wrp103 (Bill Pringle) (Talk) 00:55, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Ah. Do you mean Square as a whole, or the Final Fantasy series by itself was always 3rd Party? Poke DP 06:51, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Both.Nimrand 14:46, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Ah, OK. Thanks. Poke DP 02:18, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Issues with this article

  • This article uses abbreviations that may be confusing or ambiguous.
  • To meet Wikipedia's quality standards, the Main series section may require cleanup because it is in a list format that may be better presented using prose. It looks like Wikipedia:Proseline too.
I'm not convinced a prose form would be better than list form given the large number of games in the series and that the section's primary purpose is to list the games in the series and not much else.Nimrand (talk) 23:59, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

This sentence is factually inaccurate:

    1. In 2003, the series' first direct sequel, Final Fantasy X-2, was released.
  • Legend of the Crystal was released ages before X-2.
  • Three Final Fantasy compilations—Compilation of Final Fantasy VII, Ivalice Alliance, and Fabula Nova Crystallis Final Fantasy XIII—share many settings and themes.
  • These series definitely don't share settings, and all FF games share themes anyway; so this sentence is either totally inaccurate or too vague to be meaningful.
  • Although most Final Fantasy installments are independent, many themes and elements of gameplay recur throughout the series.
  • This contradicts what was just said above.

Other issues:

  • "Game screens" has tons of unsourced sentences
  • "Battle system" has tons of unsourced sentences, especially with the final paragraph who's totally unsourced
  • The "Music" section has a few unsourced sentences and is clearly not exhaustive as it's too much geared towards Uematsu. Only two other composers are mentioned, in passing.
  • The "History" section has a high amount of unsourced and highly challengeable sentences ("inspired by DQ", etc.); moreover, it's incomplete as the "history" which is discussed is actually just FFI and FFII. Nothing notable is said above anything past FFII.
  • An actual "Design" (not just "Character design") section which would discuss the recurring directors, battle designers, etc. of the series is missing. Hiroyuki Itou isn't even mentioned once in the entire article!
  • The "(Character) design" section just gives names and doesn't tell anything about Amano's, Nomura's, Yoshida's, etc. distinctive art styles.
  • Why is Vagrant Story mentioned? It's not even part of the series.
  • "Graphics and technology": tons of unsourced sentences.
  • "Merchandise and other media": first paragraph has only one small generic source.
  • "Anime and films" and "Literary adaptations": the last two sentences of each of these sections are unsourced.
  • "Reception": too much geared towards the US. The series was primarily designed and released for Japanese audience, yet nothing is said about Japanese reception. This is definitely not irrelevant; for instance with FFXII the designers went as far as changing the game's main character for the Japanese players' sake.

Thanks for your attention. Turd the Borg (talk) 18:11, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

I strongly disagree with you. You're just starting an edit war, and pointing out things that don't need to be improved at all. I suggest that you be more careful before ruining article's with unnecessary templates. The Prince (talk) 18:18, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
I want to improve the article, and you "IDONTLIKEIT" counterargument doesn't help much. Vagrant Story isn't even part of this series. Turd the Borg (talk) 18:21, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
You're vandalizing the article, not improving it. If you continue, you'll get blocked. The Prince (talk) 18:25, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
I'm new, I made a mistake and I've learnt something thanks to GuyinBlack25. Now I'm discussing on the talk page...I'll get blocked because I talk? Turd the Borg (talk) 18:27, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

No, because you're adding templates that you don't know anything about. The Prince (talk) 18:31, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Whoa, let's step back a second. Some of the issues listed have some merit and some don't. Let's talk this out in a constructive manner to come to an agreeable consensus. Let's go over the points mentioned above and see which are valid and which are not. (Guyinblack25 talk 18:51, 19 November 2007 (UTC))

In regard to some of the issues listed above, in no particular order.

  • With regard to the abbreviations. We don't know what abbreviations you are referring to. Without specifics, we can neither discuss/argue or fix/edit such content.
  • With regard to the series first direct sequel. Final Fantasy X-2 is the video game series' first direct sequel. You are right, that could be clarified better. I believe that because that information was listed in a subsection of the "Games" section, the collective editors felt that was implicit. Tweaking the sentence to better clarify that wouldn't hurt.
  • With regard to the three Final Fantasy compilations. It is true that those three don't share a setting, however the titles in the three separate compilations share their own respective settings.
  • With regard to the possible proseline. That particular section has undergone several different revisions to properly convey the information about the main games. The content organized into paragraph form degraded the readability of the content and tables often take up more room than they should. So given the disadvantages to those and the repetitive nature of the content, a bulleted list was used. Proseline generally applies to current events; not that it can't apply to video game articles, but it hasn't in the past that much. While the information in the section is dated and bulleted, it is meant to convey information about the separate games, not give a timeline. Each bulleted paragraph provides information on each of the main games in the video game series to be descriptive of the games.
  • I don't see how "Although most Final Fantasy installments are independent.." contradicts with "Three Final Fantasy compilations.." The words "although most" implies that most but not all installments are independent, which in turn allows for compilations to share a setting and not be independent of other installments. Could possibly be reworded, I'll look into it.
  • With regard to unsourced statements. While having every single sentence properly sourced in an article would be ideal, it is impractical and not necessary. Sources are generally meant to be added to controversial statements or content that is likely to be challenge in validity (this does not include challenging for the sake of challenging which would lead to everything being source). While we could try to source every single statement in the article, leeway must be given to allow for multiple ideas to be consolidated into single statements and/or paragraphs. Another comment I'd like to express about references is that sometimes they don't just apply to the sentence the footnote number is attached to. Some of the references cover two or more sentences, the footnote number is simply added to the last sentence. So some seemingly unreferenced statements are taken from the sources provided in the references, just not the ones directly attached to a footnote number; such as "inspired by DQ".
  • With regard to the reception section, though information about Japanese reaction and sales information is included, we'll try to find some additional Japanese criticism. Though I feel the current amount is sufficient, additional info can only help the section.
  • With regard to Vagrant Story being mentioned. A major character designer did previous work on the game, which shares a setting with FFXII and FFT. Though this connection could be better conveyed.
  • With regard to the history section. The point of the history section is to provide the background and origin of the series. A section detailing the history of the entire series would add excessive length and detail to the article. Various aspects of the games are covered in other sections of the article and in their own separate articles.
  • With regard to the design section. You're right that the section does not adequately describe the multitude of designers in this series. While we cannot include every single one, we'll try to rewrite this section to be more inclusive.

I hope this addresses most of the issues you've brought to our attention. We'll try to address the others in a timely manner, hopefully to gain your support for Featured article. (Guyinblack25 talk 20:00, 19 November 2007 (UTC))

  • TtB: although I agree that the article needs additional work, your comments here are a bit extreme. On Wikipedia, it is important to be a realist; I've noticed that you've been shot down over radical comments on other articles as well. But then again, this entire new wave of overcompensating Wikipedia editors is a problem—it's not just you. — Deckiller 20:50, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
I would like to point out that Turd the Borg's account has been blocked, I'm guessing for being disruptive in manners similar to these. While I think some of his comments deserve attention, I recommend taking it with a grain of salt.Nimrand (talk) 23:57, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

World of mana

The mana article mentions that the world of mana was a side story to Final Fantasy, though most elemnets were dropped in the second story. so wouldnt that make it partly a spinoff? Even if it was only the first game? If not it should at least get a tiny mention in the spinoff and direct sequels section. Let me know if this is a good or bad idea please. (Masterxak (talk) 01:00, 21 November 2007 (UTC))

I believe that Final Fantasy Adventure was listed before but has since been removed, though I don't why. (Guyinblack25 talk 01:16, 21 November 2007 (UTC))
It's been added back in, thanks. (Guyinblack25 talk 15:54, 21 November 2007 (UTC))

We should have put this on the Wikipedia main page!

Today (December 18) is Final Fantasy's 20th birthday. This Featured Article should have been on the main page! FFXII International + Paul Rodgers (talk) 17:44, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm, I didn't even realize that. Oh well, I'm kinda glad it didn't because Today's FA always gets vandalized so much the day of and for days after, especially "pop culture" articles. (Guyinblack25 talk 17:55, 18 December 2007 (UTC))

Reception section

Just thought I'd throw out a suggestion and see what everyone thought about it. What about adding in table of aggregate scores similar to Crazy Taxi (series)#Reception? It was recently added to Kingdom Hearts (series)#Reception as well. Any thoughts? (Guyinblack25 talk 21:29, 25 January 2008 (UTC))

Never mind, after looking at the early games, most of them don't have aggregate scores. (Guyinblack25 talk 19:26, 27 January 2008 (UTC))