| forevercloud3000 said:
That is what I said, you can't perpetuate that the argument works one way without opening up the possibility that the other side's opinion can be affected as well. FFVI's Esper system is actually closer to FFVIII's Gaurdian Force mechanics, or IX's Weapon skill system. FFVII's Materia had ways of connecting them to form cooler more intricate abilites. "All" Junctioned with "Black Magic Spells", "x4" junctioned with "Knights of the Round", "Final Blow" junctioned with "Pheonix" to create an auto revive, etc. This was a dynamic and new way to battle that VI did not have. You never permanantly learned any given spell, Materia always needed to be equipped to use it. This makes those 8-16 slots very important so you are always outfitted properly. I love how people like to perpatrate like FFVII mimiced VI exactly but they are pretty different. Orcarina of Time in no way has as much content going on as FFVII or any of the FF games for that matter. OoT is an Adventer game, much smaller in scope. Telling a story is not a race though, it needs as much time as it needs to get the full point across. Doesn't make a longer one worse than a shorter one, or vice versa. I simply meant there are a LOT more assets to manage and try and put on cartridge, this isn't even an opinion this was fact told by Squaresoft. And I geuss you are expecting me to refute OoT's merit as one of if not the Best game of all time? Sorry to dissappoint but I believe in it as a great contender for the title. Yet You see how FFVII and OoT are games people love to talk and debate about? That is what I am talking about, games that test the stand of time but haters gotta hate. Your last paragraph sounds just like those Critic/Journalists that constantly keep calling those two games out and want to dissect them every which way to prove to themselves and others that "They aren't as good as you remember". . |
Sure, subsequent FFs got a lot more money spent on them than FF6, but FF7 was still the most money that was invested in a Final Fantasy game for quite some time (I believe it only got surpassed by FFXIII). This is because of the heavy investment that Sony put on it, along with other early PS1 titles, in order to build a base. If I recall correctly, Sony gave Square advertising and publishing services in exchange for system exclusitivity. The argument on higher install base means higher sales is not an argument, but still a point that can account for additional sales.
There are possibilities in the other direction, though they seem a lot more far-fetched and desperate. I'm sure plenty of people will tell you that playing the first game in a series DOES develop a fondness for said game in the series. It's just natural that a first time in things like this can leave a big impression. It's definitely a lot better than "People only like FFVI better because they're hipsters" reasoning.
I knew you'd drag up the Materia system, because it's the only thing close to different that the game offers to it's predecessor. But the point is that all benefits from the Materia system were still evident in FF6. For example, the Offering relic in FF6 offers the same benefit as the x4 Materia. It's just a different way of showing the same thing. You cannot really say that the Materia system by itself was enough to persuade you to start playing Final Fantasy at 7, right? Besides, I'd take an unbroken ATB system over the Materia system anyday. Gameplay over gimmicks, after all...
I'm just proving my point that something cinematic does not have to be excessive in size. Ocarina of Time was a 32MB cartridge, I believe. This was due to no FMVs (used in-game cinematics), no big, bulky background images (the background was rendered much like the foreground polys) and smarter space management on secondary storage. FF7 would have been very capable of fitting on a higher-end cartridge with similar things. the problem was that FF7 was scheduled for release near the start of the N64, when those cartridge sizes were either not possible or not cost effective at the time.
