Jump to content

Recommended Posts

OK yes, FF6 was split halfway between both. WoB was linear. WoR you were unleashed in this world and could do whatever you want (after getting the Falcon). Further more, some dungeons like the final tower and Phoenix Cave were really good dungeons. No confusion with how FF6 could be considered exploration based, but I stand by my claim that FF6 is story-driven, but at this point we're not even arguing the same thing. The game could be both exploration heavy and story-driven, which FF6 is. Maybe linear/nonlinear is the correct word here

 

What I was confused with was you grouping FF1 with the story driven games. Nothing happens in the game story-wise, and very little stuff goes on that drives the story. Exploration-wise, the game opens up, giving you plenty of room to explore. It doesn't throw you out into the wilderness immediately (DQ2 after you get the boat...). It guides you to a certain extent, but gives you plenty of room to explore

 

FF1 SPOILERS BELOW

 

As soon as you cross the bridge after beating the first area, the game opens up. You can go N to Matoya's cave and talk to the brooms, or you can go straight to the coast city. Matoya's cave is completely optional at this point. Then you beat the pirates up and you get the boat. Granted, at this point, you are restricted, you don't have the entire world open to you and you can only really go to Elf land. But there's tons of land to explore, and Marsh Cave was pretty brutal. Hell, at this point you could even go to the "power peninsula" to grind.

 

All the way up to the Earth Cave, the game guides you a bit by restricting movement so you don't have the DQ2 situation of "whoops landed on the wrong island I guess..." but it gives you many opportunities to just run around and see what cool things you can do and what cool places you can go to. After this point? You can do things in a different order. It doesn't really matter what order you do things in, just as long as it gets done (technically it matters that you get an airship).

 

Point is, FF1, while it guides you a bit, gives ample opportunity to just do your own thing. It's not common for a game outside of sandbox games to give much more freedom than FF1. The vast majority of games will guide you in some way, but FF1 is open enough that the player really feels like he's in the world, exploring the world and not just another set of eyes watching another's adventures

Edited by NoKnuckles
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 76
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

DQIV. Couldn't quite get into FFIV the same way. Besides, Psaro's Final Form's got to be one of my favorite boss designs. And he's hella useful in Joker 2, just saying lol. But as a game overall, DQIV

I didn't think much of DQ4, honestly. It was okay, I guess. Perhaps ruined by the fast I had just replayed 6 immediately before my first play of 4.   Most of the bosses had the same, or very simila

I kiiiiiiinda got carried away, so I'm just going to compact this section...         Guess I should really find something that contributes to the topic at hand... ah... erm...   Oh yeah, you g

That's kind of a hard decision for me to make, as I like both Final Fantasy 4 and Dragon Quest 4.

Link to post
Share on other sites

FF1 SPOILERS BELOW

 

Well honestly I may not remember the game as well as you. But I also kind of lumped FFI in with the other FF games not so much because I felt the game was super 'story' based, but because I felt that game wasn't as open as the Dragon Quest games. A reoccouring point you kept making in your example above was how, even in FFI, you are restricted from exploring areas or progressing the story at various points until you do certain things the game tells you to do. And that was kind of my point, Final Fantasy games are mostly about 'go to Point A, trigger story event, then you can proceed to point B'. Whereas Dragon Quest games are more about 'You can go to points A, B, C or D and choose which one to do first'.

Edited by Kenryoku_Maxis
Link to post
Share on other sites

...your argument makes no sense.

 

In neither of the aforementioned series are you generally allowed to go to points A, B, C, or D and decide which to do first. Almost all of them are locked in some way until you do something at point A.

 

...also, what? FFX is entirely story driven. You're not given any choice in where to go throughout the entire game until you get the airship, which is generally the point in every other FF game when you're allowed to start doing things. (See FFVI in WoR, FFVII in Disc 3, FFVIII after SPAAACE) At least in FFIV and V, there are several means of air travel simultaneously, which lets you explore a bunch when you get access to them, and you get them fairly early all things considered.

 

As far as customization is concerned, FFVI, FFVII, FFVIII, and FFX are all pretty much the same case of "every character is roughly the same" by the end.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i prefer more FFIV more than DQIV, why? because as from my experience, FFIV had more strong points in terms of the story and the condition of that time is more desperate and also had this "i want to protect everyone" thing which so different compared to DQ series which the story was about adventuring and stuffs like saving the world from evils. (which generally RPG does, but DQ is the one that had the most strong point here)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I gotta give this one to FF4, any other game I would probably pick DQ, but DQ4 is my least favorite DQ whereas FF4 is my favorite FF.

 

What Final Fantasy character has spin-offs?

Zack and Vincent off the top of my head. There are a lot more though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

FF1 SPOILERS BELOW

 

Well honestly I may not remember the game as well as you. But I also kind of lumped FFI in with the other FF games not so much because I felt the game was super 'story' based, but because I felt that game wasn't as open as the Dragon Quest games. A reoccouring point you kept making in your example above was how, even in FFI, you are restricted from exploring areas or progressing the story at various points until you do certain things the game tells you to do. And that was kind of my point, Final Fantasy games are mostly about 'go to Point A, trigger story event, then you can proceed to point B'. Whereas Dragon Quest games are more about 'You can go to points A, B, C or D and choose which one to do first'.

 

There are two DQ games that were hands down more open than FF1. DQ1 and DQ2. And EVEN DQ2 restricted you before you got the boat.

 

DQ3 was similar, maybe a bit more open when you started orb hunting. DQ4-9 (haven't played 8) were linear and had FAR more restrictions placed on you. DQ7 was so linear it practically felt like an FF game

 

Every single game except open sandbox games have limits on what you can do early on. You can't count FF6 as nonlinear if you count FF1 as linear. You simply can't. FF6 put so many limits on you in the WoB. The game opens up in WoR, but the point I was making with FF1 was that the game puts restrictions on you before opening the world up completely. FF6's restrictions early game were far more severe than FF1. It's just that the game itself was far larger so you remember doing more stuff.

 

Yes FF1 restricts you in the sense that you have to defeat the fiends and get the orbs before confronting the final boss. But that's the same with every jRPG I can think of. Even DQ1,2,3 required a certain set of circumstances to occur before you were able to unlock the final boss. FF6 was just unique in the sense that such a large portion of the end game was optional (you could beat it with 3 characters if you wanted to)

Link to post
Share on other sites

FF1 SPOILERS BELOW

 

Well honestly I may not remember the game as well as you. But I also kind of lumped FFI in with the other FF games not so much because I felt the game was super 'story' based, but because I felt that game wasn't as open as the Dragon Quest games. A reoccouring point you kept making in your example above was how, even in FFI, you are restricted from exploring areas or progressing the story at various points until you do certain things the game tells you to do. And that was kind of my point, Final Fantasy games are mostly about 'go to Point A, trigger story event, then you can proceed to point B'. Whereas Dragon Quest games are more about 'You can go to points A, B, C or D and choose which one to do first'.

 

There are two DQ games that were hands down more open than FF1. DQ1 and DQ2. And EVEN DQ2 restricted you before you got the boat.

 

DQ3 was similar, maybe a bit more open when you started orb hunting. DQ4-9 (haven't played 8) were linear and had FAR more restrictions placed on you. DQ7 was so linear it practically felt like an FF game

 

Every single game except open sandbox games have limits on what you can do early on. You can't count FF6 as nonlinear if you count FF1 as linear. You simply can't. FF6 put so many limits on you in the WoB. The game opens up in WoR, but the point I was making with FF1 was that the game puts restrictions on you before opening the world up completely. FF6's restrictions early game were far more severe than FF1. It's just that the game itself was far larger so you remember doing more stuff.

 

Yes FF1 restricts you in the sense that you have to defeat the fiends and get the orbs before confronting the final boss. But that's the same with every jRPG I can think of. Even DQ1,2,3 required a certain set of circumstances to occur before you were able to unlock the final boss. FF6 was just unique in the sense that such a large portion of the end game was optional (you could beat it with 3 characters if you wanted to)

 

I don't know what to say except I feel we have different views of what we think are 'open' and therefore our entire arguments are based on different things.

 

I completely agree that DQ7 is very lnear like a FF game however and I would also say some other DQ games are similar, including DQ VI. I often argue that the game forcing you to lose Keifer, Maribel and Gabo is a lot like what FF games make you do, forcing you to lose characters through death like Aeris or practically 3/4 your team in FFIV.

 

But I would actually say DQI is far more linear than you say. Yes, you can freely explore the world, but that doesn't mean you have the ability to do much. You still need to find certain items and do certain things. You CAN skip saving the princess, skip getting the flute, skip getting the loto armor and etc...but the game will be a massive chore if you do. Just like in many FF games, you CAN skip doing a lot of side quests and exploring...but the game will be a lot harder as a result.

Edited by Kenryoku_Maxis
Link to post
Share on other sites

How is that different from every other game though? In FF6, you have to do the floating continent as well as all of the quests leading up to it (which were linear. You had a choice after the Lete River but in the end you have to do all 3 quests anyway). And in the WoR, you didn't have to gather teammates beyond Edgar and Setzer, though neglecting teammates would make the game a ginormous pain. I haven't played 8 and 10 so I won't harp on that. 5 is linear, but you covered that with your statement that you liked customization (ie I interpret that as FF5s character customization is good enough that it makes up for the linearity).

 

I just don't see how FF6 can be considered open while FF1 is considered linear. I mean, if you just said FF1 was linear and we went back and forth, I'd have just assumed that every game in the history of everything not named Elder Scrolls was considered linear, and accepted how you defined open. But you threw an unhittable curveball at me when you said FF1 was linear combined with the fact that FF6 was open.

 

MAYBE, you felt FF6 was less linear than FF1 because of how much bigger the game was. The game put you on rails for the majority of it, then flung you into the WoR where it was open, and even though a huge portion of the game was extremely linear, there was still enough stuff to do during the end-game that it felt satisfying. FF1 kept you on rails for a smaller percentage of the game, but the game was just so much smaller and had less content overall that even though a larger PERCENTAGE of the game was about exploration, there was less TOTAL amount of exploration done.

 

Would that be accurate? That although WoB was linear, there was so much content that it didn't matter?

Link to post
Share on other sites

MAYBE, you felt FF6 was less linear than FF1 because of how much bigger the game was. The game put you on rails for the majority of it, then flung you into the WoR where it was open, and even though a huge portion of the game was extremely linear, there was still enough stuff to do during the end-game that it felt satisfying. FF1 kept you on rails for a smaller percentage of the game, but the game was just so much smaller and had less content overall that even though a larger PERCENTAGE of the game was about exploration, there was less TOTAL amount of exploration done.

 

Would that be accurate? That although WoB was linear, there was so much content that it didn't matter?

 

Well, I thought I explained it before, but maybe since you said you haven't played FFVIII you didn't quite get my whole point.

 

I felt that FFVI had more 'open' aspects because, while the WoB has a pretty set story, there's multiple things you can do outside the3 story that are optional. A lot of NPCs you can talk to and items/side quests you can complete that you can outright skip, which is somewhat uncommon in Final Fantasy games. But both FFVI and VIII did this a lot and it made both feel a lot more open, almost like Dragon Quest games, where exploration had purpose. Whereas in games like Final Fantasy III, IV, VII and XII, I would spent hours talking to every NPC, look at every side area and explore every part of the map out of habit...and pretty much find nothing for my trouble. The worlds felt empty, like large narrow corridors where I only needed to talk to a select few key NPCs to progress the story and if you're lucky, find a rare hidden chest behind a wall with an ether or phoenix down in it. Whereas in FFVI, I would find a random chainsaw behind a wall or in FFVIII, I would be rewarded with a whole random 5 hour side quest and a GF boss fight, because I bothered to explore outside the main boundaries of the story.

 

Do you kind of understand what I mean now?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I think. Bigger game, more stuff, more optional stuff, more meaningful optional stuff, Out of curiosity, what DQ title did you think had meaningful exploration and what were the rewards? For me, if I understood you correctly, it was purely medal-hunting. I couldn't think of any other meaningful rewards for exploration. Most treasure, you'd spend hours finding and you open it and it's like "MEDICINAL HERB ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!?!" but that one time you find a medal you're like "sweet." To the point where you'll just walk on every single tile in the game and spam the A button

Edited by NoKnuckles
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I think. Bigger game, more stuff, more optional stuff, more meaningful optional stuff, Out of curiosity, what DQ title did you think had meaningful exploration and what were the rewards? For me, if I understood you correctly, it was purely medal-hunting. I couldn't think of any other meaningful rewards for exploration. Most treasure, you'd spend hours finding and you open it and it's like "MEDICINAL HERB ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!?!" but that one time you find a medal you're like "sweet." To the point where you'll just walk on every single tile in the game and spam the A button

 

Are you serious? There's tons more to do in most DQ games besides just finding mini-medals. Most DQ games are built entirely on exploration, item collecting and talking to NPCs. So much so, sometimes you have to go out of your way to find the trigger to advance the story because there's so many secondary objectives and extra content to explore.

 

As for which game I think did this the best, that would be DQVIII. A huge open world to explore, dozens and dozens of side quests, huge towns you could spend hours exploring, spending hours just searching chests/knapsacks/cuboards/bookshelves/pots/barrels/wells for secrets and items, tons and tons of NPCs who fleshed out the world and story beyond just the main story trigger NPCs, a simple but deep alchemy system, super fun casino and monster collection systems, etc. Honestly, mini medals are kind of an afterthought for me and I usually only bother with collecting them near the end of the game to get unique items like Orichalcum/Dangerous Bustier/Metal Equipment/etc.

Edited by Kenryoku_Maxis
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes

 

Because I am understanding your point less and less and I seem to really be missing what you're trying to tell me

 

I'll back off from FF6 as I think that's been confusing the hell out of me and if we stay on that track we'll just talk in circles and I won't get any closer to your point

 

What do you think of DQ3? We'll start there

Link to post
Share on other sites

What do you think of DQ3? We'll start there

 

I don't know what to tell you. My answer is going to be mostly the same. DQIII also focuses on NPC interaction, tons of item collection and exploration. And the things I liked most about it was the near total freedom of being able to complete one 'story' event, then literally being left to your own devices to find your next objective. So you end up going off to explore a whole new part of the world you haven't seen yet, find a hidden villiage of faries with a short side quest, stumble upon a cave with some nice armor, explore a town you don't need to be at yet that has some nice attribute books and gear, find a fun guy in a random house in a forest, and after all that is done, you will happen upon the next castle which is the next 'story trigger' you needed to actually find.

 

Where, once again, in most FF games, you would just be told 'go to X town and see Y person'. With maybe a cave and a random house along the way, which you are usually required to visit before proceeding.

Edited by Kenryoku_Maxis
Link to post
Share on other sites

I must be massively misremembering FF1 and imagining it to be bigger than it is.

 

Does the world not open up when you get the boat? I'm looking at the world map, and indeed there are a lot more story triggers than I remember and a lot less optional areas, so I'll give you that one

 

http://www.gamefaqs....tasy/faqs/49418

 

The plot triggers are Gurgu and Ice Cave at the bottom right. You have access to Onrac (unless there's some sort of barrier that I've blocked out of my brain), the Ordeals sidequest and Lefein. Lefein at this point is useless so let's count this out. So you have access to class change (which is completely optional) and 7th tier spells in areas you're not supposed to be at yet.

 

FF1 is simply a small game with not that much to do (much smaller than I remember), so that's likely where the gap in our understanding is occurring.

 

*Sabin and Setzer

 

Edgar is optional. (I mean, Gerad is optional.)

 

You sure Sabin is required?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really think its just a misunderstanding. If I understand your view, you seem to be saying that because some FF games had similar customization and eventually allowed you to explore the whole world that they weren't entirely linear. And in that way, I would agree with you. But to me, there's a difference between a game opening up in the last 10 hours with an airship and a game which is focused entirely on NPC interacton and exploration.

 

To me, most DQ games have a lot more exploration the entire game. You had a lot more interaction with NPCs, searching for items, ability to explore outside a set path and freedom to do side quests than in most FF games. And that this was built into the very core of Dragon Quest games. While in most FF games, the opposite was true and they focused on the story with a more linear progression.

 

Note, I'm not saying one is better than the other and I'm not saying all FF games did this. Again, I feel FFVI and VIII broke from this tradition and had a lot of exploration/NPC interaction as we discussed. And likewise I agreed that DQ7 was super linear with tons of characters leaving your party and little exploration outside the main story, like the average FF game. The reason all these comparisons came up is because the thread is comparing FF4 to DQ4, which I feel FF4 is one of the prime games that focuses on the linear FF style with characters dying, go from point A to point B and 'plot twists' every other hour.

Edited by Kenryoku_Maxis
Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought about it for the last little bit and the misunderstanding is on my end. We actually agreed on most points except for FF1. Due to poor memory on my part, FF1 was actually a lot smaller than I had imagined. I think we also talked in circles, hitting on confusing comparisons (I was so hung up on comparisons when I should have taken a game on its own and examining its merits), so if I were to consolidate your points, it goes as follows (correct me if I'm wrong):

 

- Games are typically composed of two components: mandatory main quests (story triggers), and optional quests

 

- The more optional content (including side quests, optional dungeons, hidden treasures) the game has, the more alive the world feels

 

- The more meaningful the optional content is, the more incentive there is to explore the optional stuff. This "meaningfulness" (now I KNOW that's not a real word...) could be in the form of tangible rewards like an nice weapon, or it could develop the world by revealing aspects of the plot (FF6 WoR had a bit of both, for example you learn something about the backstory of a character)

 

- There's a sliding scale of meaningfulness, ranging from so meaningful that it's almost a necessity, to so petty that you might as well have ignored it. An example of the former is DQ1. While a good portion of the game is optional, it might as well not be because the bonuses are so immense that you more or less need it to complete the game at a reasonable level. An example of the latter is Matoya's cave in FF1, where you could visit it far earlier than required, and the reward would be getting 4 items that you could buy from a store, and the knowledge that pushing B Select opens up the world map.

 

The confusion comes from my memory of FF1; I really felt like I was doing a lot in the game, when in fact the only real choice was the Ordeals quest. So I'm sorry for talking so authoritatively on something that I turned out to be a bit foggy about

 

I'm just gonna consider this solved, and that we now understand where the misunderstanding comes from

 

Back on the topic of FF4, I can't be the only one who thinks that the story and characters are overrated. DKnight Cecil was interesting, and it was nice seeing him redeem himself. But he was never really dark. His rise from dark to light was more about him growing a spine and standing for his beliefs (which is cool) than it was about him going from murdering innocents to being a cool guy

 

Aside from all the linearity/exploration talk, I found DQ4's story to be more engaging. A big part too was the villain. A cool villain in DQ4 vs a flat one in FF4. A good villain is just as interesting (if not more) than an interesting hero.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Back on the topic of FF4, I can't be the only one who thinks that the story and characters are overrated. DKnight Cecil was interesting, and it was nice seeing him redeem himself. But he was never really dark. His rise from dark to light was more about him growing a spine and standing for his beliefs (which is cool) than it was about him going from murdering innocents to being a cool guy

 

Aside from all the linearity/exploration talk, I found DQ4's story to be more engaging. A big part too was the villain. A cool villain in DQ4 vs a flat one in FF4. A good villain is just as interesting (if not more) than an interesting hero.

 

I agree. But I don't even think its the characters fault. Its the focus on story that limited the characters ability to grow. You only really get to know characters like Telah, Edward, Edge, Palom and Porum for a few hours before they are killed or leave your party for story reasons. As for Cecil, I'd actually say he's one of the few legitamitely strong protagonists in the FF series and the plot point of him neing a 'nice guy forced to be a Dark Knight who kills people' was a good one. It was actually pretty good symbolism that they turned him from a Dark Knight into a 'white' Knight. The problem is, pretty much everything after that point is weak storytelling of 'go to point a, kill boss, go to point b, repeat'. And you have very little character development for Cecil again until pretty much 5 hours before the end of the game.

 

I guess what I'm trying to say is, the characters in FFIV aren't overhyped, the story is. And I definitely think the chapter based story for DQIV, which focuses on the characters, is much better. Even when I think Psaro is one of the weaker antagonists in the DQ series. And that's because Psaro is not really an antagonist to me, more of a chaotic neutral.

Edited by Kenryoku_Maxis
Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not what antagonist means. You could say that he's not really a villain to you, but he's DEFINITELY an antagonist to you.

 

And no, I'm confusing my Figaro brothers again. It is indeed Edgar and Setzer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

but DQIV is better than DQV (for me, don't kill me).

 

Gentlemen, set phasers to "maim", and fire at will.

Lazor.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dragon Quest 4 is more enjoyable to me, but I only watched Final Fantasy 4 being played out. That said, FF4 does impress me, but I found FF9 much more intriguing.

 

DQ4 also holds bias in me for it was the game of the series i attached to early as a kid due to the party mates. I always thought of them as real when I set up a tactic and they sometimes strayed but learned from their mistakes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, FFIV is one of my first RPG with FFVI, so it holds a particular place in my heart....

And Kain is still one of my favorite character. I prefer him to Psaro, sorry....

And my first experience with DQIV is the horribly outdated NES Version. The graphism was horrible and every spell made my eye bleeds...

That say, DQIV have the different chapters whichis a really interesting and enjoyable way to enjoythe story. Torneko's chapter is pretty interesting and different from what you're used to see. It was made better in the remake with the addition of the bag.

And it had the first playable Slime with Healie, even if it was for a short time... Definitely a plus for me. I also really like Alina, Meeena/Maya.

I only played DQIV,V, VI and IX, and it's not my favourite.

 

DQ VI being my first DQ had more impact for me, even with the awful French Translation which made it hard to understand the game (basically all the talks to people in town were switched. )

 

FFIV has awesome music. Kain(Far better character than Cecil IMO, it's way to redemption is far less caricatural than Cecil"s ), Edge, Edward, Palom and Porom, Tellah. Rydia is pretty cool too. Rosa is a great healer and Theme of Love is a wonderful theme, that's about everything I care. And Zeromus' Final Speechmade a big impression on me when I was young, even if it's pretty cliché.

 

FFIV is my favourite here, mainly because I have far more memories of it than DQIV.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...