FFVII Crossover Wishlist?

Tifa and Aerith's outfits would be nice. Or better yet one of the Honey Bee dresses for both genders.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Enla

Tifa and Aerith's outfits would be nice. Or better yet one of the Honey Bee dresses for both genders.

---

Be careful there.

There's a strong hate on it in the west because that part wasn't ethical.
Apparently for reasons I don't know.

Personally I loved it, for me it stays true to the original which was something I wanted.

The motorbike and Cloud's outfit are already basically in the game through mogstation and veteran rewards. With FFXIV being basically a fan service MMO and ontop of part 1 for FF7 being released, i do think they should do some kind of event to commemorate it's release hopefully in the coming months. Or if we bother them enough for it. But i'm sure their hands are full already with content soon to come. While it would be nice to see all the glamour from FF7 i would also like to see glamour from FF7 Advent Children.

I think the Cloud glamour we have already actually is the outfit from Advent Children. I haven't looked at it recently but I seem to recall it having the Fusion sword holster on its back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RitsukoSonoda

I think the Cloud glamour we have already actually is the outfit from Advent Children. I haven't looked at it recently but I seem to recall it having the Fusion sword holster on its back.

---

It is, it's not the First Class SOLDIER outfit he wears in the original game/Remake, nor the

Shinra trooper uniform he really wore story wise 'five years ago'

. It does go with the Fenrir SDS mount though (which is after all from the same film). ;)

Similarly, Squall's outfit in the game is not his original FFVIII outfit but the 'redesign' from Kingdom Hearts (that he also wore in Dissidia as well).

Funnily enough of the three PS1 era FF game protagonists whose outfits are available here in FFXIV, only Zidane's FFIX outfit is correct for his actual game appearence. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Enkidoh

Funnily enough of the three PS1 era FF game protagonists whose outfits are available here in FFXIV, only Zidane's FFIX outfit is correct for his actual game appearence. ;)

---

Must be becuase he was neither in KH (even though Vivi was) nor in a game that had a sequel movie...or anything for that matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morningstar1337

Must be becuase he was neither in KH (even though Vivi was) nor in a game that had a sequel movie...or anything for that matter.

---

Out of the PS1 era FF games it felt like 9 got the least attention out of them also in regards of marketing and exposure. It's one of my favorite entries in the series tbh and might be due to the step back from realism and heavy sci-fi tones going back to a more classic feeling FF setting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RitsukoSonoda

Out of the PS1 era FF games it felt like 9 got the least attention out of them also in regards of marketing and exposure. It's one of my favorite entries in the series tbh and might be due to the step back from realism and heavy sci-fi tones going back to a more classic feeling FF setting.

---

IX is often overlooked for a number of reasons; aside from the "regression" to a medieval setting, it released at the tail end of the PS1's lifespan, and with X as a PS2 launch title, a lot of people decided to ignore it in lieu of X. That's not to say it's a perfect game - the story focuses a bit much on Garnet and Vivi, and the decision to not have a leaked EXP feature left some characters in the dust after Disc 2 - but it is still very good and worth playing.

As for the lack of IX characters in Kingdom Hearts... well, that's because all of the Final Fantasy character imports were designed by Tetsuya Nomura, KH's director, and he didn't want to mess with character designs that weren't his own. The only exceptions by popular demand are VI's Setzer and IX's Vivi, who have only small parts in KH II.

And to be fair, most games in the series don't have sequels, prequels, or spin-offs. Only IV, VII, X, XIII, and Tactics have expanded universes (for lack of a better term), and the quality of their additional material is highly debatable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RitsukoSonoda

Out of the PS1 era FF games it felt like 9 got the least attention out of them also in regards of marketing and exposure. It's one of my favorite entries in the series tbh and might be due to the step back from realism and heavy sci-fi tones going back to a more classic feeling FF setting.

---

It would be nice for FF9 to get more love. When Square Enix created an official poll to be broadcasted in Japan, FF9 actually ranked as the 4th most beloved Final Fantasy game (FF14 is 5th, FF6 is 3rd, FF7 is 2nd, FF10 is 1st). In comparison, FF8 was ranked at 7th and beaten by FF5 (a game that came out way too late in the West) which ranked at 6th place.

If I recall FF9 currently holds the highest Metacritic score of all Final Fantasy games. It's unfortunate that the score didn't translate to having many sales since, as Cilia mentioned, FF9 released at the tail end of the PS1's lifespan. It was also revealed simultaneously alongside FF10 and FF11 (it would be a miracle if Square Enix ever announces multiple Final Fantasy reveals again) so many opted to go for FF10 for the PS2 instead.

Also, a good chunk of the FF9 team are also gone I think. Director Hiroyuki Ito disappeared from public attention (is he still with the company?), Co-Producer and Writer Hironobu Sakaguchi (creator of Final Fantasy) was ousted by Square Enix, and Artist Hideo Minaba started his own freelance art company CyDesignation.

The veteran developers who are still very active with the Final Fantasy brand are Tetsuya Nomura and Yoshinori Kitase so it's expected for Square Enix to give more attention to FF7, FF8, FF10, and FF13 rather than FF9 whose lead developers are missing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jandroid

It would be nice for FF9 to get more love. When Square Enix created an official poll to be broadcasted in Japan, FF9 actually ranked as the 4th most beloved Final Fantasy game (FF14 is 5th, FF6 is 3rd, FF7 is 2nd, FF10 is 1st). In comparison, FF8 was ranked at 7th and beaten by FF5 (a game that came out way too late in the West) which ranked at 6th place.

If I recall FF9 currently holds the highest Metacritic score of all Final Fantasy games. It's unfortunate that the score didn't translate to having many sales since, as Cilia mentioned, FF9 released at the tail end of the PS1's lifespan. It was also revealed simultaneously alongside FF10 and FF11 (it would be a miracle if Square Enix ever announces multiple Final Fantasy reveals again) so many opted to go for FF10 for the PS2 instead.

Also, a good chunk of the FF9 team are also gone I think. Director Hiroyuki Ito disappeared from public attention (is he still with the company?), Co-Producer and Writer Hironobu Sakaguchi (creator of Final Fantasy) was ousted by Square Enix, and Artist Hideo Minaba started his own freelance art company CyDesignation.

The veteran developers who are still very active with the Final Fantasy brand are Tetsuya Nomura and Yoshinori Kitase so it's expected for Square Enix to give more attention to FF7, FF8, FF10, and FF13 rather than FF9 whose lead developers are missing.

---

The low rank of eight doesn't surprise me. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it was a bad game, it wasn't. It's just, that there was a time when having the Final Fantasy title automatically raised expectations to the next tier compared to everything else. (except maybe Dragon Quest) And for me, eight was the first game in the series to fail to meet those raised expectations. Again, on it's own merits, it wasn't bad. Release that game with a different title and I would've called it great. But given the Final Fantasy title it didn't live up to what I thought I was buying. Nine, on the other hand, was excellent. The closest thing I had to a complaint with nine was the lame 'official strategy guide' which turned out to be a thirty dollar advertisement for Square's online guide. (Want to know more? Look it up on our site 'cause we're too lazy to tell you in the 'guide' you paid for!)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ransom

The low rank of eight doesn't surprise me. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it was a bad game, it wasn't. It's just, that there was a time when having the Final Fantasy title automatically raised expectations to the next tier compared to everything else. (except maybe Dragon Quest) And for me, eight was the first game in the series to fail to meet those raised expectations. Again, on it's own merits, it wasn't bad. Release that game with a different title and I would've called it great. But given the Final Fantasy title it didn't live up to what I thought I was buying. Nine, on the other hand, was excellent. The closest thing I had to a complaint with nine was the lame 'official strategy guide' which turned out to be a thirty dollar advertisement for Square's online guide. (Want to know more? Look it up on our site 'cause we're too lazy to tell you in the 'guide' you paid for!)

---

VIII's problems are myriad.

It came out on the heels of VII, which to this day is one of the most popular entries in the series. Expectations were unbelievably high.

Unfortunately, its themes and battle system were drastically different from its predecessor. Leveling up did nothing for your stats; instead you had to draw magic out of enemies and junction it to your stats to actually improve your combat efficiency. Leveling up did, however, increase the stats of enemies, as well as change their item drop and steal tables. Limit Breaks were present only as Desperation Attacks, limiting their tactical uses (well, unless you have Aura); getting new ones also requires a fair bit of know-how depending on who you're using (as opposed to just using them / killing enemies and using a manual for the final one). A fair amount of VIII's easily accessible combat augmentations are only available through Chocobo World, which runs on a Pocket Station... a Pokémon Pikachu-like peripheral that was never released outside of Japan. Weapons aren't bought and sold like normal, but upgraded at special shops with item drops from monsters. You only get a SeeD paycheck as opposed to earning money from battles (which makes logical sense, but gets vexing if you don't know how to raise that). Compounding it is that little to none of this is explained in-game, or otherwise not given the weight it needs.

The story, meanwhile, is centered around Squall and Rinoa's romance and Squall's abandonment issues. VII had more universal themes of self-acceptance and moving on after failure that resonate with a wider audience (and is part of why I find VII:R's ending so contentious... but I digress).

tl;dr: VIII had too much to live up to, an esoteric combat system, and a narrower audience compared to its predecessor.

My main complaints with IX are the inability to save Trance for when you really need it, the lack of leaked EXP leaving certain characters in the dust (Freya gets it worst, but Quina and Steiner also suffer for it), and the story focusing so heavily on Garnet and Vivi it becomes detrimental to the rest of the cast (Freya's character arc is completed early in Disc 2, Amarant's is pretty much self-contained in Ipsen's Castle, etc).

Still very good, both are, but the reasons they're not as popular as some other entries is pretty clear.

Something to also remember about FF7 is that Video games didn't really start becoming a mainstream thing until the days of PS1. There is a considerable amount of the franchise's fanbase that didn't know Final Fantasy even existed before 7 came out. As a result many also look back on that title with potent nostalgia goggles because it was their first RPG experience.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RitsukoSonoda

Something to also remember about FF7 is that Video games didn't really start becoming a mainstream thing until the days of PS1.

---

How are you defining "mainstream"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MsQi

How are you defining "mainstream"?

---

At the risk of sounding old, videogames - like comic book (anything) were considered niche, for nerds, not profitable enough for the wider audience. They had a negative stigma attached to anyone even affiliated with them as just a hobby.

Playstation changed ALL of that, between the floundering drought that was the N64 game library/limited hardware/utter live betrayal at an electronic show and Sega's poor console support left a huge opportunity for Sony to capitalize on a wide and potentially neglected audience. They marketed to a wider audience, an older audience, and women (gaming was considered a boys only affair for a while). The Playstation did what Nintendon't (I know, I know): They made gaming cool, trendy even. Games had huge marketing push behind them and Final Fantasy 7 has a rather interesting history on why SquareSoft (before they became SquareENIX) became exclusive to Sony for two console generations. One can argue gaming didn't become more mainstream until the PS2, but PS1 jumpstarted the big budget AAA titles.

Add the Battle Arena to Gold Saucer and call it good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tracewood

At the risk of sounding old, videogames - like comic book (anything) were considered niche, for nerds, not profitable enough for the wider audience. They had a negative stigma attached to anyone even affiliated with them as just a hobby.

Playstation changed ALL of that, between the floundering drought that was the N64 game library/limited hardware/utter live betrayal at an electronic show and Sega's poor console support left a huge opportunity for Sony to capitalize on a wide and potentially neglected audience. They marketed to a wider audience, an older audience, and women (gaming was considered a boys only affair for a while). The Playstation did what Nintendon't (I know, I know): They made gaming cool, trendy even. Games had huge marketing push behind them and Final Fantasy 7 has a rather interesting history on why SquareSoft (before they became SquareENIX) became exclusive to Sony for two console generations. One can argue gaming didn't become more mainstream until the PS2, but PS1 jumpstarted the big budget AAA titles.

---

Maybe that's how Sony likes to tell it, but it was more gradual with a lot more players. Video games were hardly underground before that. I'm not saying the Playstation and FFVII weren't important, it's not some point where video games suddenly became mainstream. Atari was marketed as family entertainment and sold at Sears.