Let's keep Character Crossovers from other Square-Enix titles out of FFXIV.

[Obsy]

it's the connotation he's using it with that matters.

You called him on the misuse of a word. Connotation or not, he was correct despite your comfort with its implications. And now we're arguing semantics just as I predicted, so I'll just nip this whole retcon debate in the bud, if you don't mind.

Okay, let's start with the first point. The first Final Fantasy was meant to be Squaresoft's last game before they closed down, and they weren't counting on the game selling so well to keep them afloat. When it did sell well, they decided to make a sequel. But, unlike other sequels, they decided to create a new world with new characters and a new battle system, and this idea has been going on ever since. While it's true that the games weren't made to be connected, there was nothing really to prevent them from being connected later on, and in fact were when Dissidia was made.

While I appreciate the history lesson, it's both already generally known and completely irrelevant to the conversation. This neither promotes nor denies the need for cosmic tie-ins.

First, how do you know it doesn't belong there? Are you writing XIV?

Don't do that, please. It's needlessly disrespectful and condescending in an otherwise rational discussion. I've more than once pointed out that my views are my own, I don't need to be put on the spot about it by someone else, it detracts from the actual conversation.

Second, that's a poorly written shoehorn.

That's precisely my point. And...

Since we don't know how well Lightning will be put in, we can't say if it's poorly written or well written. [...] I'm pointing out that we don't know how Lightning will be written in, and that some people here are coming off as prejudicial.

...as I discussed later with Aish, correct; we don't know. This is where fears stem from, which are given further ground to stand on when supplemented with images of gear and weapons that blatantly stray from what's been solidly established for XIV since 1.0. Regardless of it being vanity gear or not, it gives those concerned for a world's overall theme plenty to be leery of, despite promises of "don't worry you guys! It'll be okay!" It may very well be okay, but until then, it's suspicious.

No, there is a correlation, considering that storyline and writing, especially in RPGs, is a factor in the score.

Dare I invoke the power of Twilight? Once again, critical acclaim and good writing need not be connected.

The thing is, stories aren't being adjusted at all. Nothing's really changed if they added in this idea that the worlds are connected or not. [...] But the thing is that nothing really changes. If X takes place in the distant past of VII, what changes? Aeris still dies, Sephiroth still goes nuts and tries to summon a meteor, and Blitzball is still the most boring mini game in the series.

I'm afraid you might be missing my point. Objectively, no, the story of a game that's later tied to another through one means or another hasn't changed. The way that that story is subjectively regarded by audiences now, however, is effectively out of the creator's hands, and it can and does change things depending on the individual. Some choose to accept it cheerfully, others may piss and moan, others still may outright ignore it. Refer to my previous response regarding VII and X as an example. Of course the tie-in won't literally change the hard-coding of my PS1 discs, but now armed with even the idea that there's some "grander scheme" that got wedged in there later? I have to admit it's pretty goofy, and has the potential (for myself as an individual, I do not speak on behalf of others) to tarnish the image of what's usually seen as a franchise that can tell individual stories that can stand on their own merits without having to rely on cosmic tie-ins.

I'm just providing an analysis of how it could happen. I'm not writing the thing, just looking and thinking about it. What I write really has no bearing whatsoever in Final Fantasy.

Except that you're using it as an argument for what's being done officially. Either be accountable for your argument or don't argue.

I don't think it's unreasonable either. But I also think it's unreasonable to just blatantly say "No" just because there's a fear that it could ruin the story, especially because these kind of events are supposed to be fun.

I'll give you that, as I'm inclined to agree. (with the "supposed to be fun" part)

I feel SE has actually picked the middle ground on this. Yoshida has stated that dead people and people who's story has ended will not be coming in. (while the second part is extremely vague and probably the biggest worry for people against crossovers, I assume it means characters that have gotten the "And they lived happily ever after, never to be heard from again" treatment. The other possibility is that it'll only be characters from games that have sequels in-develpoment or have not yet been released) Also, he's cooperating with both XIII and XIV's teams to ensure the story fits.

I'll admit that I'm also in agreement here to a degree. I appreciate that he's at the very least pushing to make things work out. Again, I fall back on "it just sucks that this is even necessary", which is essentially the take-home message I'm trying to get across.