Thread 12162984

New to the series. Which ones should I play? Are the early ones worth playing or should I just go for the biggest titles like 7?

Maybe the Sega System spam wasn't so bad if the alternative are these low effort threads.

Start with Shin Megami Tensei

>>12162990
Agreed. At least you can filter those easily.

>>12162984 (OP)
Always go with release order.

>>12162984 (OP)
Start with Dragon Quest

>>12162990
Fuck, now I miss the Saturn threads

>>12162990
So you prefer outright spam threads to threads that actually introduce a topic of conversation? I don't understand that mentality, or why it's so prevalent here. What the fuck do people expect from OPs? What lofty goddamn standards do they have?
>>12163010
That's a silver lining, I guess. Personally, I'd still much, much rather see threads like this than have spam shitting up the board and killing other threads.

>>12162984 (OP)
if you don't mind the 2D games, start with IV. Personally IV and VI are my favorite of 16 bits era. the 8 bits are just too archaic. can't go wrong with the ps1 games though.

>>12163140
you talking about the original north american snes releases? II and III?

It's interesting how the community has changed over the years, when I was a kid in the late 00's (yes zoomer) FF I was considered an absolute classic and must play, because Americans gen X who grew up playing nes like the AVGN were the majority back in the day.
Now millennials are the majority and the original FF is considered almost unplayable.
Still, I recommend the original if you don't have any problem playing an 80's rpg, and use guide's if you need them, people back in the day used guide's from videogame magazines.

1 > skip 2 and 3 > 4 > 5 > 6 > 7 > (optional skip these) 8 > 9 > 10 > skip the rest, play Tactics in between if you aren't SRPG allergic.

>>12163223
yes

>>12162984 (OP)
FF6 is a masterpiece for sure. Play them in backwards order until they get tedious.

>>12163296
Is there a common storyline?

>>12163315
nta but not really.
There are a few common elements that they bring back on occasion (elemental crystals, summons/monsters etc.) but almost every game takes place in a different universe, though there are a couple direct sequel spinoffs.

If you can only play one entry, play 7. If you can only play 3 entries, play 5, 7 and 10. If you can play as much as you want, play them in release order either starting from 1 or 4. 1-3 are very archaic. 4 is first one with more character and story driven game. 5 is light but has great gameplay with any character picking and changing any job. 6 is good, good story but the large ensemble party migh get you bewildred. Also most characters become same because everyone can learn every spell so only their personal skill sets them apart. 7 is iconic and for many players THE jrpg. 8 is good ludo kino but has bad reputation because players after 7 were expecting more of th same, 8 has lot of customization, ways to break the game and great card game but the plot twist might ruin you. 9 is homage to the previous ones, very little customization and if played on original hardware you notice the battle transistions and animations from idle to executing the command slow and sloggish. 10 is the last good main line game, first one to have voice acting, no world map but the battlesystem is wholly turnbased.

You know its really weird we have a "which FF should I play?" thread every 3 or 4 days.

>>12162984 (OP)
If you're actually serious, play them in numerical order and on their original consoles, emulated or otherwise. Though with FF7 and FF9, the Steam ports aren't bad IIRC. Otherwise stay away from remasters.

>>12163407
>If you can play as much as you want, play them in release order either starting from 1 or 4. 1-3 are very archaic.
I agreed with everything up to this point, 3 is not archaic. 4 came out barely a year later and it barely looks better. Starting with 4 just creates people who think 4 revolutionized the industry when in reality if you start with 1,2,3 youll find that 4 is not particularly special and takes a lot of steps back.

>>12163226
>Now millennials are the majority and the original FF is considered almost unplayable.
This is some delusion you just made up.

>>12162984 (OP)
Play all the original versions in order starting with 1 and ending with 9.

>>12163413
>the Steam ports aren't bad
7 is just the original PC release with boosters, it has a few bugs which cause CTD but otherwise is great, 8 has the added benefit of adding the Chocobo minigame in a seperate window you can use to get some items. I have no experience with 9 on PS but the PC version works fine.

>>12162984 (OP)
Start with FF II, then start with Final Fantasy Legend series, and then never look back at FF ever again.

Play 3 and skip all the others

>>12163443
Enter any FF thread

Make sure you play IV through IX, basically. The SNES and PlayStation games. That's the best era of the series, all of those games are good. X and XII are pretty cool still, and the NES games are great if you don't mind NES RPGs.

XI seems nice but it's an MMO.

>>12163226
>admitted zoomer
>let me tell you about the anonymous makeup of online demographics and what people did before I was born
ok bud

>>12162984 (OP)
Depends on what you care about. If it's gameplay then you're probably gonna enjoy 1-5 more than anything after, and you're gonna get very disappointed when you get to 6 after hearing everyone saying it's a great game. If you want a good story and presentation it's the opposite, you're gonna get bored by 1-5. Also, look into the difference between versions. 4 for example has the original US release with the shitty translation, the PSP release with weird graphics but better everything else and extra content, the 3D release that is harder and also has different extra content, or the weird looking pixel remaster for you to choose from.

>>12163226
Genuinely moronic post.

>>12163674
>and you're gonna get very disappointed when you get to 6
6 is gameplay focused and the second half of it is the most open this series has ever been

>>12163640
Millenials grew up at the same time JRPGs were gaining traction overseas, most were probably introduced to the series with 6-7 and would be curious enough to look into 1-5.

Your delusion that millenials disregard the original 5 is just zoomer revisionism. Your weird ass generation needs to shut the fuck up about how things were back in MY day.

>>12163706
Why do you guys even get mad? I never talked about "your days", I'm taking based on my own experience, I also never said that millennials disregard the first 5. I'm only talking about the first one.

>>12163701
>6 is gameplay focused
What I hear even from people who love the game is that it's buggy and broken, and way too easy.

>>12163880
>is that it's buggy and broken,
It isn't

>>12163880
Well it's a JRPG, so of course it's "broken" in the sense of having horrible, horrible balance, and of course it's too easy. That's just JRPGs; it's not something that makes this one game special. As for bugs - the main bug in the game was big enough to warrant an official update even during the time of cartridges, so that's not an issue anymore.

>>12163880
>>12163890
>buggy and broken
True to an extent, but most of it won't matter for your first playthrough if you don't know all the tricks. Obviously things like Vanish+Doom are broken and there's the Sketch bug and stuff, but for most players the bugs won't matter much. A lot of FF games are full of bugs, like certain spells or stats not working. FFVI might have more that are game-breaking, but it's no big deal. Later versions and patches fix most of them anyway.
>way too easy
It's fairly easy yeah, but "way too easy" is subjective. People will still die here and there if they haven't played tons of RPGs. As an anecdote, I watched a friend play it the first time recently, and they got way more game overs than expected. Most RPGs are very easy if we're being honest, it's not like the other FFs or popular SNES RPGs are much harder. And stuff like Super Mario RPG is way easier.

I'd also say an easy level of challenge doesn't inherently make something not gameplay-focused. You're still exploring, setting up your party, and getting into fights most of the time, with relatively short cutscenes.

>>12163914
> the main bug in the game was big enough to warrant an official update even during the time of cartridges, so that's not an issue anymore.
The main bug is the evasion bug though and they never fixed that on SNES

>>12163914
>and of course it's too easy. That's just JRPGs
>>12163917
>Most RPGs are very easy if we're being honest
there are levels to this

>>12162984 (OP)
5s the best one, but id never say to start there
4 6 and 7 are good ones if you like a more story-driven one
1 3 and 5 are more straightforward JRPGs. good ones tho.
if you dont wanna play a 2D one, i always thought 12 was a nice game. beautiful gfx for PS2, and maybe the best eng VAing in any JRPG ive ever played

plotwise, it doesnt matter where you start. the games arent related to one another at all

>>12163952
>there are levels to this
True, but even with that in mind I don't think VI is at the bottom level of difficulty. Just looking at Square ATB games, Chrono Trigger and FFVII are probably easier overall. I'd also say it's more interesting to play than many other RPGs, with all the options it gives you to mess around with. That can be fun in its own way, regardless of balance. Kinda like how Castlevania: Symphony of the Night is still fun even if it's easy and broken in a million ways.

I feel like once you've played a bunch of RPGs, the differences in difficulty levels between most of them feels trivial, since they're all on the easy side. Not to say there aren't genuinely challenging RPGs, of course.

>>12164003
That said, if challenge and balance is very important to you, FFV is best in that regard. The job system also makes it great for replaying too.

>>12163973
>5s the best one, but id never say to start there
starting at 5 might be the best strategy if your goal is to maximize your love of 5. The worst part about 5 is its a remake of 3 which is a remake of 1 and its another fucking game about crystals. I cannot believe they are doing another game about crystals and hours of scenes of cid building an airship again.

>>12162984 (OP)
How does Lich even do that to your party? I wrecked that fool the first battle.

>>12164090
why do you post about games you've never played?

>>12163914
>Well it's a JRPG, so of course it's "broken" in the sense of having horrible, horrible balance, and of course it's too easy. That's just JRPGs
The problem with a comment like this is that FF6 has very bad balance when compared to 4, 5, and even 7, all of its closest peer games. So saying "that's just JRPGs" is lazy and retarded when viewed in the proper context.

>>12163880
6 is gameplay-focused when compared to almost any Playstation JRPG onward. You spend the overwhelming majority of play time actually playing the game and not just watching cutscenes and running through pretty environments.

>>12164402
>FF6 has very bad balance when compared to 4, 5, and even 7
>even 7
Eh. Not sure about that. Enemy Skill alone breaks the game. Though the broken options in VI are given to you, while you have to look a bit for Enemy Skills (even if Matra Magic is right outside Midgar). Even without broken skills, VII is a less challenging game. FFVI has more bosses that can trip up new players, and a bit more complicated dungeons. Plus the World of Ruin is open-ended and you can get into some dangerous situations if underprepared (at least until you find the overpowered equipment).

FFIV is more tightly balanced but that's easier to do when you have a predetermined party setup. FFV is more balanced than VI and VII, but you still have plenty of broken options. You can just Gil Toss your way through a good chunk of the game.

Either way, I think it's fair for him to say these balance differences don't matter all that much in practice when the games are easy either way. Balanced stats and formulas are nice, but it's not the end-all-be-all of an RPG. An RPG can be perfectly balanced but boring, or an RPG can be broken but still entertaining. Sometimes having a lot of broken skills is cool.

Plus the main context here was him saying it wasn't "gameplay-focused". You can say they weren't focused on balancing the gameplay to be challenging, or they didn't put enough thought into it, but I don't think that makes the gameplay a less important part of the game. Then again, I wouldn't say Playstation and later RPGs are less gameplay-focused either - more cutscene heavy doesn't mean a lack of gameplay.

>>12164449
Like I understand that VI's balance is messy. Things like too much easily obtained defense ignoring abilities, weird formulas, broken items (elemental shields were made way too good, Magic Evade maxxing making you basically invincible, etc.). The game is full of things like that. You could fairly call it the least balanced of those FFs. But I think "very bad" balance compared to them overstates it a bit, because it makes it sound like the balance completely ruins the experience compared to the other games.

>>12164449
>VII is a less challenging game
Apart from Enemy Skill, the overall experience is far smoother.
Balance is just not about challenge, it's about the systems working together smoothly.
It's about mechanics consistently presenting reasonable tradeoffs.

Enemy Skill has a few genuinely unbalanced abilities.
There are some gimmick weapons like Master Fist and of course the ultimate weapons.
All are easily avoidable or even missed.
Meanwhile
Green and red materia boosts magic stats, yellow usually boosts physical stats.
Add weapon/equipment choices and you optimize each character for desired roles.
There's a good spread of equipment across all the characters.
Results are observable, they aren't placebos.

In FF6, evade is completely broken
Most of the stats you can raise with Espers make no difference, and one makes way too much difference.
You can pretend stamina matters in FF6.
You can pretend beads are helping, like the game says says they do.
See the difference?

>Balanced stats and formulas are nice, but it's not the end-all-be-all of an RPG.
This has nothing to do with the retarded comment I was responding to.
He insinuated that all JRPGs are equally unbalanced therefore balance does not matter at all.

>Plus the main context here was him saying it wasn't "gameplay-focused".
The comment I responded to is no less stupid given the context.

>Then again, I wouldn't say Playstation and later RPGs are less gameplay-focused either
I would. I have measured it.
FF7 isn't that bad though.

>>12164513
>But I think "very bad" balance compared to them overstates it a bit
There's no other words to express it succinctly. I didn't say it ruined the game, you added that. Square did a great job making sure none of broken shit would ruin an average normalfag's experience with the game.

>>12164656
>All are easily avoidable or even missed.
Yeah, but there's also a lot of materia that's freely available and very powerful, like some of the summons. There are stat trade-offs for materia, but they generally can be ignored.
>See the difference?
I see the difference. It's a messier game in that respect. Evade not working also means the whole Blind status doesn't work, making the Goggles do nothing. FFVII has some similar issues - like how the armor's MagDef doesn't work, so equipment like the Wizard Armlet won't help the way the game says. But VI has more of that.

I will say though that Evade is fixed in any current version, and you'll hardly notice the difference for most of the game. It is better that Beads actually do what they say at least.
>I would. I have measured it.
I'm curious, maybe share data if you have it recorded. It's not universal though I'm sure. PlayStation has so many JRPGs and a lot of variety in the types of games. On average, I'd guess they have more cutscenes, but also more content than SNES RPGs.
>I didn't say it ruined the game, you added that.
Fair enough. Wasn't adding that to put words in your mouth. Just wanted to share my opinion on it.
>Square did a great job making sure none of broken shit would ruin an average normalfag's experience with the game.
Seems like we more or less agree then. Perhaps I'm a normalfag, because I'm not bothered at all by things like Stamina not being useful. Outside of quirks like that the systems in FFVI are enjoyable. More so for me than most SNES RPGs outside of other FFs and the SaGa games, which I find on-par. I'm not even saying you're wrong about the balance compared to the other games, your criticisms are fair. I'd just argue there's not a huge gap in balance between VI and VII, even if VII's systems are more clean. Not big enough that it seriously hurts the experience for most players. I can understand if it bothers some people more than me.

>>12164394
youre saying 5 isnt a game about crystals and you dont watch cid build an airship?

FF7's materia stat changes, FF6's esper level up stat bonus and FF8 using junctioned spells are not that big. They are only for autists. In the end it doesn't matter if your stat goes up 1, 5 or 10 stat points. It doesn't matter if your attack deals 4000 damage or 3600 damage. It doesn't matter if you take 1000 damage or 1200 damage. They are only there to give illusion of choice for players.