You're right about that. It was a really disorganized disagreement. Frankly, I figure it was half because nobody could tell what the hell the others were saying.

the other half would be the thread starter...just being here and reading fanboy posts makes me feel like my IQ's dropping

I think FF7 was revilutionary in its presentation. It seems to follow suit as far as gameplay but if you look at the game and the way it was presented, yeah it was revolutionary. The look and the animations of the summons, the cgi, the way the battles were presented. These things IMO were never done in a rpg. I think credit has to be given where it is due. Its not even my fave FF game, heck its not even my fave rpg but I tip my hat off to it for bringing rpgs into the mainstream. I know a whole lot of people that bought a ps1 for FF7. Millions of people cant be wrong. There was something special about the game and not only fanboys are saying good things about it. The game got rave reviews and I think the article shows that years after, the game can be looked upon as one of the best. Some of these opinions even come from other developers. They even praise the game. With that being said, its was a great game. I dont understand why that is denied so often.

Bizzle I realize you are new, but have common knowledge.

I think FF7 was revilutionary in its presentation. It seems to follow suit as far as gameplay but if you look at the game and the way it was presented, yeah it was revolutionary. The look and the animations of the summons, the cgi, the way the battles were presented.


Wrong. The gameplay was standard FF-fare. ATB battles (which had been done since FFIV), magic, summons, and a fanfare when you win. As for the graphics, I've said it a jillion times, but Tekken 2 was released over a year before FFVII and it's FMV's are far superior. Other than that, you're drooling all over FFVII because it was the first FF with ZOMG 3d graphics. Big deal. It was a natural thing, and a long time in coming, seeing as how pretty much everything by then was 3d (Castlevania: SotN being the one notable exception).


I know a whole lot of people that bought a ps1 for FF7. Millions of people cant be wrong. There was something special about the game and not only fanboys are saying good things about it. The game got rave reviews and I think the article shows that years after, the game can be looked upon as one of the best. Some of these opinions even come from other developers. They even praise the game.

While I'm sure some developers have commented favorably on FFVII, I've yet to hear of one putting it anywhere near the pedestal fanboys like you put it. As for the article linked in the original post, its obvious bias has been pointed out several times in this thread. The fact that Squeenix and Sony threw truckloads of money at magazines, which would obviously put pressure on the reviewers, has also been covered. As for the sales figures, that's more or less a result of the mega advertising blitz that Squeenix and Sony put on. Millions of people bought FFVII because they didn't know there was anything else.


With that being said, its was a great game. I dont understand why that is denied so often.

It's "denied so often" because the game has glaring flaws, even for a game released in '97. I know you're new and all, but if you did even a little bit of reading here, you'd see what kind of flaws I'm referring to. I tend to be one of those "FFVII haters" because I really rail against it (and FFVIII, to a lesser degree) being unjustly put upon this golden pedestal.

Well, FF7 has become legendary in a way. People debate about it even after a decade after it's release date...

Well, FF7 has become legendary in a way. People debate about it even after a decade after it's release date...

The same applies to Hitler. Wanna put him on a pedestal now?

Well Hitler deserves it more, at least he's an intelligent fellow.

Actually, Hitler was pretty dumb. He just surrounded himself with really great people who were able to help hide that fact. But he was smarter than your average FFVII fankid...

Hitler's graphics were better.

Actually, Hitler was pretty dumb. He just surrounded himself with really great people who were able to help hide that fact. But he was smarter than your average FFVII fankid...

there was only one thing i gotta give props to Hitler for...
how could he get a large group of followers to kill his own people?...that takes some know-how, so he HAD to have been smarter than the average FFVII fankid to pull that off

Wrong. The gameplay was standard FF-fare. ATB battles (which had been done since FFIV), magic, summons, and a fanfare when you win. As for the graphics, I've said it a jillion times, but Tekken 2 was released over a year before FFVII and it's FMV's are far superior. Other than that, you're drooling all over FFVII because it was the first FF with ZOMG 3d graphics. Big deal. It was a natural thing, and a long time in coming, seeing as how pretty much everything by then was 3d (Castlevania: SotN being the one notable exception).



While I'm sure some developers have commented favorably on FFVII, I've yet to hear of one putting it anywhere near the pedestal fanboys like you put it. As for the article linked in the original post, its obvious bias has been pointed out several times in this thread. The fact that Squeenix and Sony threw truckloads of money at magazines, which would obviously put pressure on the reviewers, has also been covered. As for the sales figures, that's more or less a result of the mega advertising blitz that Squeenix and Sony put on. Millions of people bought FFVII because they didn't know there was anything else.



It's "denied so often" because the game has glaring flaws, even for a game released in '97. I know you're new and all, but if you did even a little bit of reading here, you'd see what kind of flaws I'm referring to. I tend to be one of those "FFVII haters" because I really rail against it (and FFVIII, to a lesser degree) being unjustly put upon this golden pedestal.

I dont know why you would label me a fanboy. Is it everytime someone mentions FF7, and the word good in a sentence they are automatically labeled a fanboy? That word gets thrown around too often and its not used properly. I didnt say OMG THE BEST GAME EVER!!!!! CLOUD ROCKS!!!!!!!!!! I stated what millions of people around the world are saying. Majority rules.

I stated what millions of people around the world are saying. Majority rules.

Do you have a point? George W. Bush won a majority of the popular vote in '04. As for you being a fanboy, you're defending FFVII despite every logical arguement against it--that rather makes it a dead giveaway.

Majority? More like vocal minority.

Do you have a point? George W. Bush won a majority of the popular vote in '04. As for you being a fanboy, you're defending FFVII despite every logical arguement against it--that rather makes it a dead giveaway.

Bush and a ff game cannot be compared. Bad example. Im just saying give credit where its due. Logical arguments? Saying that square and sony payed off magazines so they were forced to give it good reviews? Wheres the evidence of that? That doesnt seem logical. So with that being said, you are implying that sony or squeenix paid off ign to write that ariticle iceberg linked? If you hate that game thats fine with me but I find it silly to try to find anything you can to discredit FF7.

http://psx.ign.com/articles/150/150494p1.html

and

http://psx.ign.com/articles/080/080401p1.html

Compare. See how FF8 was ranked above FF7 despite it being inferior as a game to FF7, while FF7 got an almost perfect review. Inconsistency is their biggest giveaway.

Also, note how games like Valkyrie profile and Star Ocean are nowhere in their listing. Valkyrie Profile and Star Ocean 2 are given considerably lower ratings compared to FF7. 9.1/10 and 8.8/10 respectively. SaGa Frontier is given 7.0/10, Tales of Eternia is given 8.5/10 and Alundra/Alundra 2 are given 8.5 and 7.7 respectively. Interestingly, all the PS1 FF titles are given scores 9/10 or above.

PS : Vagrant Story : 9.6/10 LOL While I like this game a lot, it suffers from meticulous shortcomings and doesn't deserve such a near-perfect score.

Bush and a ff game cannot be compared. Bad example. Im just saying give credit where its due. Logical arguments? Saying that square and sony payed off magazines so they were forced to give it good reviews? Wheres the evidence of that? That doesnt seem logical.


Hey, good job on ignoring posts in this very thread that detail why FFVII isn't great. Like the one that I had, that was pretty close to a page, that you almost completely ignored in favor of "well lots more people like it so nyah nyah!" At any rate, why should FFVII be given credit? Because it sold a kajillion copies? Okay, FFVII is probably the most popular of the FF's, if not the most popular console RPG of all time. However, as I've said a kajillion and one times, popularity does not equal quality. Look at Dubya and Scientology.


So with that being said, you are implying that sony or squeenix paid off ign to write that ariticle iceberg linked? If you hate that game thats fine with me but I find it silly to try to find anything you can to discredit FF7.


Once again, you ignore what's been posted at least once--like my position on FFVII. Not to mention that it's been explicitly stated just how biased that article is. Not only that, you fail because we were all referring to the game's initial reviews in magazines 9-plus years ago, not some half-assed, pander-to-the-fanboy-readership "best game EVAR" article.

In conclusion, if you want the "haters" here to give FFVII anything close to the recognition you obviously want it to have, you'd better give us far better reasons than "lol a kajillion people bought it" and "zomg magazines gave it awesome reviews."

http://psx.ign.com/articles/150/150494p1.html

and

http://psx.ign.com/articles/080/080401p1.html

Compare. See how FF8 was ranked above FF7 despite it being inferior as a game to FF7, while FF7 got an almost perfect review. Inconsistency is their biggest giveaway.

Also, note how games like Valkyrie profile and Star Ocean are nowhere in their listing. Valkyrie Profile and Star Ocean 2 are given considerably lower ratings compared to FF7. 9.1/10 and 8.8/10 respectively. SaGa Frontier is given 7.0/10, Tales of Eternia is given 8.5/10 and Alundra/Alundra 2 are given 8.5 and 7.7 respectively. Interestingly, all the PS1 FF titles are given scores 9/10 or above.

PS : Vagrant Story : 9.6/10 LOL While I like this game a lot, it suffers from meticulous shortcomings and doesn't deserve such a near-perfect score.

i totally disagree with any ratings given from ign...they're the same freaks that ragged on the 360 and said that the PS3 was something to look forward to when we all know that Sony's known for releasing faulty products (look at the first gen PS2s and the massive battery recalls)
i also hate the fact that Valkyrie Profile got a much lower score from IGN than FFVII, and it bothers me to no end why Star Ocean 2 got anything lower than a 9.3 when both games are far superior no matter how much you pretty-up FFVII

That's exactly my point, IGN wouldn't know an unbiased review if it smacked them in the face and anally violated them till they BLEED.

If you hate that game thats fine with me but I find it silly to try to find anything you can to discredit FF7.

Why? If you're fine with other people not liking it or considering it bad then why should it suprise you they aren't inclined to give it credit?

Anyway it's not hard to work out why the game is as overrated as it is once you start comparing it to other games. The fact you've felt it's necessary to say thats silly suggests to me you're somewhat misinformed on what makes a good game. If you took more of an open minded attitude to what others have said in here then, believe it or not, you'd actually learn something.

Ah--
What I think he meant is what I mentioned earlier....
The flaws and discredits you can attribute to FF7 don't really matter to him, since he loves the game regardless of those....

I'm not exactly sure what would be "overrated" and what would be "correctly-rated", but I think it has something to do with more people enjoying it than a person believes that it deserves.
So then, following that definition, the game would be overrated to anyone... Because like, there are many people who like the game a lot, and the total enjoyment of many people is greater than that of one person, so then, for every person FFVII would have a total enjoyment and praise greater than they gave it, and therefore it would be overrated. >>

You're not entirely on target about the whole "overrated" thing. FFVII is "overrated" because its rabid fans (and the plethora of mags and websites vying for their readership) continue to put tags like "best," "awesome," "great," etc, when it clearly isn't.

That's a pretty ridiculous definition, NorseFTX.

That's a pretty ridiculous definition, NorseFTX.

You're referring to my definition? What would be more correct?

Look at what you quoted to answer your own question.

Humf. >>
I didn't mean that seriously--since that part I wrote on "overrated" was just a play on the meaning of the words "over" and "rated"....

And of course it couldn't be the "best, greatest ever"! Do you think they could ever really mean that seriously...? I think they really meant "best, greatest ever in my experience"...
Mm, and maybe that shows their lack of experience....
But you could like, say, "Yeah, FF7 wasn't that bad. But take a look at THIS!" and show them a bunch of RPGs that you believe blows FF7's ass away. And then they can decide....
<<
If they still say FF7 is the best, then it's just a little bias....<< I personally could never place any of the games I played as "best", since they all offered so much enjoyment in so many different ways....
Just don't assault them too much with "It's not the best" such that they'd think they're under attack and try to defend themselves and cling to the idea of "It's the best"....

Ah--
What I think he meant is what I mentioned earlier....
The flaws and discredits you can attribute to FF7 don't really matter to him, since he loves the game regardless of those....

If thats the case then, as I mentioned earlier in the other thread, then really he should have had enough sense not to post in here. The thread isn't about being dogmatic. If everybody took that attitude in a debate then nobody would ever get anywhere or learn anything. It's factual knowledge which contributes and is important.


I'm not exactly sure what would be "overrated" and what would be "correctly-rated", but I think it has something to do with more people enjoying it than a person believes that it deserves.
So then, following that definition, the game would be overrated to anyone... Because like, there are many people who like the game a lot, and the total enjoyment of many people is greater than that of one person, so then, for every person FFVII would have a total enjoyment and praise greater than they gave it, and therefore it would be overrated. >>

Not the case at all. Good things have been said about the game which are completely inaccurate, as in the examples Joan gave above. Thats why it's over rated. If you're still not too sure about this then it's a good idea to get some knowledge on what goes into the making of a good RPG game and a closer examination of the game. With a little common sense and observation, it soon becomes clear that alot of the things quoted as being the games strengths are either incorrect or exaggerated.

Look at what you quoted to answer your own question.

When I quoted it, Norse's name wasn't there. Thus the confusion. :-)

I'm afraid quotes don't change when a post is edited. You must have loaded the page before I made the edit to clarify (you had posted while I was looking at the thread and making my own post) and clicked quote after I made the edit. You just didn't notice that what you were quoting was different. haha

The thing about it is I'm not a huge fan of the game. I like the game
but its far from my favorite. The game was a great rpg in IMO. I don't
see how it is bias to like it if its all a matter of opinion. The
reverse can be said for the people who hate the game. Their bias is
fueled by their hate for the game and no matter what arguments or
comments are made, they will always talk negative and try to counter
any positive statement in ff7s favor. Its so much to the point where it was
stated that square paid off magazines to give the game great ratings. Ok
even if that were true what would be the purpose of gamespot putting ff7
as one of the best games of all time 9 yrs later? What benefit do they
get out of it now? If 10 people review the game, mind you these are
people who get paid to review games, and 9 of those reviewers give it
almost perfect score, that means its a great game. Same goes for any
game. In ff7s case, it got rave reviews. That's just stating the
obvious. Now any writer from a magazine or website who praises the game
today is a fanboy and they are bias? They know more about games and have
played more games than any of us. If anyone would know how to criticize a
game it would be them. They are professionals. Are they ever wrong, yes.
But if the majority of the reviewers give a game great scores, what
does that mean? It means its a good game. Same goes for movies, music etc. Not just games.

You really are a moron. Do you even attempt to comprehend what people say to you?

You really are a moron. Do you even attempt to comprehend what people say to you?

Oh so we are not going to attempt to act like adults here? First name calling then what, you're going to pinch me? Come on grow up.

Ok if square paid of magazines to give FF7 good reviews, where is the proof of that? Thats what Im saying, that statement can not be proved and leads to my point of people saying anything to discredit the game. What didnt you understand?

Finally someone who talks with some common sense and doesnt just flame unneccesarily.I definetly agree with Bizzle.

Ok if square paid of magazines to give FF7 good reviews, where is the proof of that?


God cannot be proven.

Does he not exist?

God cannot be proven.

Does he not exist?


No one really knows. Thats a really bad comparison.

Can anyone prove that theory about square paying people off? If not then it holds no relevance.

No one really knows. Thats a really bad comparison.

Can anyone prove that theory about square paying people off? If not then it holds no relevance.

agreed

No one really knows. Thats a really bad comparison.

Can anyone prove that theory about square paying people off? If not then it holds no relevance.

Exactly, point proven.

I was being sarcastic by acting out a scene from South Park.

I was being sarcastic by acting out a scene from South Park.

lol.

I was being sarcastic by acting out a scene from South Park.

God could be a giant flying Spagetti monster

Ok if square paid of magazines to give FF7 good reviews, where is the proof of that?

Hmm have to admit that's a good question. While i've no doubt that what ChunkyMunkey said is valid, unfortunatley I don't know the answer to that one...

Not the case at all. Good things have been said about the game which are completely inaccurate, as in the examples Joan gave above. Thats why it's over rated. If you're still not too sure about this then it's a good idea to get some knowledge on what goes into the making of a good RPG game and a closer examination of the game. With a little common sense and observation, it soon becomes clear that alot of the things quoted as being the games strengths are either incorrect or exaggerated.

Oh...! XP I see....
I never was really clear with what exactly people mean by "overrated". So it's like, when people say things inaccurately in a better light than it actually is? So people who say that "They plotline was very good" are overrating it right? (Since by what I've heard you guys say, the plotline is not good)

Mm....so "overrated" can only occur when others give an evaluation of the game; the game cannot be inherently "overrated".
Is this correct?
So--...are your complaints about "overrated"ness due to the praise that people give the game, rather than the game itself...and the problem you have with FF7 isn't with the actual game, but with the fanbase?

I really hope english isn't your first language.

Actually, it isn't...>> But that's not enough of an excuse...I think I was in a bit of a rush, so some of the grammar came out wrong....
The first paragraph should be--
"I was never really clear with what people meant by "overrated". So...it is when people say things inaccurately in a better light than it actually is, right? So, by your account(s), people who say that "The plotline was very good" are overrating it (Since by what I've heard you guys say, the plotline is not good)"

The second paragraph makes enough sense, I think...>>

Is the problem you have with FF7 against its fanbase? Or against the game itself...?

Oh...! XP I see....
I never was really clear with what exactly people mean by "overrated".

If something is over rated then it means it's considered to be better than it truly is. Thats certainly the case with FF7. Many fans of the game disagree, but if you take a really good look into the differences between a good and bad game, then it's not hard to see that it's a fact. If FF7 was truly as good as so many people say it is then no describing it as being a really good game woudn't be over rating it. As things are though, most of the things which are described in the media as reasons that FF7 is a really good game are wrong. That's why it's an overrated game.

Alright--!

...SO.
For you people--is your problem against the fanbase, or the game?

The game is mediocre at best. I have no real issue with it purely as a game, but the fanbase really gets me. It's a so-so game at best, so the fanboy gibberish really kills any possibility of still liking it.

Ah....
><

I wish the fanpeople knew this....
I mean like...their proclamations of them liking the game are making other people like the game less.
I think they want to get other people to agree with them or something, but they're kind of having the opposite effect....>>

Quite a few of the morons have been notified of this in the past. They just respond with something along the lines of, "ZOMG!!11! i luv ff7 cuz clouds got a huge sord and tifas boobs are liek omg big."

Quite a few of the morons have been notified of this in the past. They just respond with something along the lines of, "ZOMG!!11! i luv ff7 cuz clouds got a huge sord and tifas boobs are liek omg big."

And you wonder why FFVII has such a big fanbase?

ROFL. But really, look at the Soul Caliber games. I don't see fanboys drooling over that all day.

<<

Ah--...
About Soul Calibur...maybe it's because as a game, it's more complex than FFVII, so then there would be fewer fanboys that are like that.....

Hmm....
Is there anything that we can do about this "mindless fan" syndrome? Or do we still have no cure as of now?

Bring Hitler back to life, but alter his brain so that he only cares about VII fanboys. Then we just sit back and watch the show.

OO!??!
That's not curing them...! That's like, killing them!

....XD
<< And no! I would not enjoy seeing that at all. Not one bit!!

Curing? Killing? What's the difference? Curing a disease is like killing the organism that caused it. Just look at fanboys like a virus.

If something is over rated then it means it's considered to be better than it truly is. Thats certainly the case with FF7. Many fans of the game disagree, but if you take a really good look into the differences between a good and bad game, then it's not hard to see that it's a fact. If FF7 was truly as good as so many people say it is then no describing it as being a really good game woudn't be over rating it. As things are though, most of the things which are described in the media as reasons that FF7 is a really good game are wrong. That's why it's an overrated game.


I understand that point but saying that is really saying that everyone who is a credible reviewer is wrong. I really find it hard to see why it was given such a high rating from the majority of reviewers if its a mediocre game. There were a lot of things that could have been fixed in the game, but with every game there is always room for improvement. The game is definitley above any average rpg.

This has been reviewed time and time again. The PS1 generation had no idea about the previous FFs. Most of them just didn't own NESs or SNESs. And even if an older sibling had one, a lot of kids just didn't play the old FFs, whether it was due to difficulty, graphics, less "badass" characters, or the lack of emos. The majority of reviewers are idiot teens/guys in their early to mid-twenties who played the game when they were somewhat younger and never looked at the game critically. And, just so you know, based on the stuff I've seen from dozens of "crdible reviewers" it seems that they pull the stuff out of their asses.

This has been reviewed time and time again. The PS1 generation had no idea about the previous FFs. Most of them just didn't own NESs or SNESs. And even if an older sibling had one, a lot of kids just didn't play the old FFs, whether it was due to difficulty, graphics, less "badass" characters, or the lack of emos. The majority of reviewers are idiot teens/guys in their early to mid-twenties who played the game when they were somewhat younger and never looked at the game critically. And, just so you know, based on the stuff I've seen from dozens of "crdible reviewers" it seems that they pull the stuff out of their asses.


You have no idea what age or how many ff games each reviewer played prior to ff7. This is an example of what Im talking about. Why is it have to be some lame excuses to why the game was reviewed so highly. Its like if you guys are reaching for anything to say. Its nothing against you but just look at the post. None of it is factual.

I am part of what I called the PS1 generation. I can name a dozen people, who I personally know, that hold VII in very high regards and still won't listen to anything I have to say. And a "credible reviewer" could be anyone who knows the person who owns the site/magazine/etc., endorses whatever it is, or just happens to be eloquent yet challenged when it comes to critical thinking.

I am part of what I called the PS1 generation. I can name a dozen people, who I personally know, that hold VII in very high regards and still won't listen to anything I have to say. And a "credible reviewer" could be anyone who knows the person who owns the site/magazine/etc., endorses whatever it is, or just happens to be eloquent yet challenged when it comes to critical thinking.


Its just funny how Ive never seen any other game's scores in question as much as I see FF7's. The general consensus of this forum seems to lead toward calling each positive FF7 reviewer a fanboy or even say that they are bias. And these are people who play game and review them for a living. I find it really funny. I respect anyone's opinions. So if you were to say hey that game sucks and state reasons, I respect that. And Ive seen may shriners do that. But to make up excuse after excuse for the high scores of FF7 is really silly. Dont you think? Honestly?

Most of the people that come here and praise VII speak broken english, curse far too much when referencing it, and blatantly disregard any warnings they are given. It is really difficult to respect a fanbase when they act in such a dispicable manner, and that behavior doesn't help the game one bit. VII has been shown to be mediocre, and it is up to the person to decide whether they'll even take that into account, but it's up to us to present real evidence and ridicule idiots when neccesary.

EDIT: VIII got extremely high reviews as well. Does that make it the second or third best Final Fantasy? IX got lower scores than both part of the time. Does this make sense?

Most of the people that come here and praise VII speak broken english, curse far too much when referencing it, and blatantly disregard any warnings they are given. It is really difficult to respect a fanbase when they act in such a dispicable manner, and that behavior doesn't help the game one bit. VII has been shown to be mediocre, and it is up to the person to decide whether they'll even take that into account, but it's up to us to present real evidence and ridicule idiots when neccesary.

EDIT: VIII got extremely high reviews as well. Does that make it the second or third best Final Fantasy? IX got lower scores than both part of the time. Does this make sense?

I agree about the bad grammar lol. But I think the language of the non fanboys happens to be worse as they tend to be really disrespectful and all they do is insult. Put the fanbase aside and set your views on the game. Not the people who represent it. What you have to see if FF7 has proven to be mediocre by people who post at this forum. FF7 got high reviews by respectable websites and magazines alike. Its up to the person to decide if they will take that into account. The numbers dont lie and the ridiculing is not needed.

As for FF8, I liked the game but its far from my favorite RPG. I really love FF9. I wish the game did get higher ratings but it didnt. There is nothing we can do to change it.

Well, it's quite simple, really, the way it works.

People on the shrine, Prak most notably, look at the plot of FFVII from a literary standpoint, pointing out in what ways it is bad storytelling. I have never seen a critical review of the game from a "credible reviewer" that cites any specific examples; reviewers typically avoid spoilers, which are essential in arguing the effectiveness of the plot, as anyone familiar with literature would know. If you don't bring everything together well with a good ending, then your plot just sucks balls, whether there's good writing in it or not. Also, most of the buyers of video games are simply looking at reviews for what some guy thought about the game and not the details of the different qualities of it.

If there's an example of an article that uses specific examples to critique the storyline of FFVII, post it here. The article you posted at the beginning did no such thing. All it did was briefly describe the introduction and say a few things about the characters without backing them up. That is why you cannot say magazine or internet articles on a game are an indicator of its quality; the article is just some guy stating his opinion. Discussing character development, the smoothness or awkwardness of dialogue, the plot twists or lack thereof, and the connectivity of the plot is discussing facts to support your conclusion about the game's quality. Sure, quality is subjective to a degree, but it is not completely subjective like many people argue.

Look at the games objectively. There is no way in heaven or hell that VII is better that IX. EGM rated Ratchet and Clank: Up Your Arsenal 9/10 (or a score of that calibur) when it was painfully short, the story laughable at best (and not in a good way), and the movement controls were terrible. It still received a high score. Now, I view EGM as a respectable magazine, but that is just pure crap. Saying that just because people buy a game and that it receives good scores form a magazine doesn't really prove much othe than that people may have bad taste in games and/or that the magazine may have had biased/not fully experience reviewers.

Sometimes what you guys term as "Simple, uncomplex, unpolished, and generally substandard" in FF7's plot is part of the reason that it's so simple to get into. That's why many people, even the ones who didn't play the earlier FFs, got into FFVII easily....

Even though it's not exactly one of the most critically good games, it also takes knowledge to know what's universally appealing to everyone--something that's easy to approach...
Normally, the "dumb gamers" that you guys talk about wouldn't sit still long enough for a classic RPG, and lots of them say that RPGs are boring and dumb, and all that stuff. But FFVII was an RPG that was able to draw those types of people in....
FFVII touches the most base parts of the mind in a way that other RPGs haven't...and that's the easiest part for many people to relate to. It doesn't stimulate the higher mind as much as other RPGs might have...but if it did, it wouldn't really be FFVII anymore.

Sometimes what you guys term as "Simple, uncomplex, unpolished, and generally substandard" in FF7's plot is part of the reason that it's so simple to get into. That's why many people, even the ones who didn't play the earlier FFs, got into FFVII easily....

If that's the case, then people are far stupider then I could ever have imagined.


Even though it's not exactly one of the most critically good games, it also takes knowledge to know what's universally appealing to everyone--something that's easy to approach...

Not really. It's pretty easy to distinguish what games one person will like copmpared to what another will like.


Normally, the "dumb gamers" that you guys talk about wouldn't sit still long enough for a classic RPG, and lots of them say that RPGs are boring and dumb, and all that stuff. But FFVII was an RPG that was able to draw those types of people in....

Those are the types of people that we ridicule because they can't put a sentence toghether and act all high and mighty simply because they beat a game my 8-year old brother has beaten. People like that need to stay at the malls and keep snorting their shit.


FFVII touches the most base parts of the mind in a way that other RPGs haven't...and that's the easiest part for many people to relate to.

I think Prak was the first to bring up the avatar concept involving characters from VII. He pretty much said that the characters don't have much of a personality and don't develop much because that allows gamers to associate themselves with the characters and feel as if they are part of it. The idea maeks a lot of sense considering how many people say that they like Cloud because he reminds them of how they were as kids.


It doesn't stimulate the higher mind as much as other RPGs might have...but if it did, it wouldn't really be FFVII anymore.

You're right, if it stimulated a "higher mind", it wouldn't be VII. But really, is that trully a bad thing?

Look at the games objectively. There is no way in heaven or hell that VII is better that IX. EGM rated Ratchet and Clank: Up Your Arsenal 9/10 (or a score of that calibur) when it was painfully short, the story laughable at best (and not in a good way), and the movement controls were terrible. It still received a high score. Now, I view EGM as a respectable magazine, but that is just pure crap. Saying that just because people buy a game and that it receives good scores form a magazine doesn't really prove much othe than that people may have bad taste in games and/or that the magazine may have had biased/not fully experience reviewers.


With Ratchet, the story doesnt take itself serious. I thinks its done that way on purpose. The controls arent too bad and the gameplay itself is good IMO and ive played all the ratchet games including the cell phone ones. To sit theer and level up each gun to make then stronger is great. IMO its a great platformer and its as a fun multiplayer. Maybe that game wasnt the best example.

Ah...
I haven't played Ratchet myself, so I don't have anything to say about that...XP

Mm, but you're right too, Kailas....
I mean this completely seriously--you're probably "above" FFVII and enjoying it the way those people do, as are most of the people whom FF7-fanpeople term as "FF7 haters".

I don't think I'm above that though....
.....
But I'm alright with that....I don't mind enjoying things that are on a simpler level.

I like to find beauty in everything or at least something positive out of everything (though sometimes I like to do it just in defiance of the people who think that it's the worst thing in the world >>). I think there's something wonderful about everything, even the simpler things that people might be cynical about. There might even be something wonderful about being cynical, too. I just...can't stand it when people don't notice those good things, or take those things for granted....

What numbers? The reviews. I did not contradict myself at all.

You trumpet said reviews about and then say "It's up to the person to decide whether or not to take that into account." In the context of this discusssion, your precious reviews are either relevant or irrelevant. You contradict yourself by suddenly putting the reviews in this grey area.


So its safe to assume a game like halo 2, which was heavily marketed, was only given good reviews because it would be in the best interest of the magazines and websites who review it? Or is that just the case with FF7?

Despite the fact that I like Halo 2 (and still play it from time to time), it's pretty common knowledge that it's almost as overrated as FFVII. I don't need to go any further, since Prak's pretty much said it all on that topic.

Humf! So everyone here seems to be complaining about what other people say about games....

Don't be so upset!! Especially if you guys seem to think that their opinions don't matter! >=(

>>

Can anyone prove that theory about square paying people off? If not then it holds no relevance.

Imagine that--another strawman built by iceberg. As far as I know, there isn't a giant conspiracy theory among FFVII-"haters" about Squeenix and/or Sony "paying off" gaming mags. What has been said repeatedly is that it would be in the best interests of said magazines to give FFVII positive reviews, seeing how much Sony and/or Squeenix put into advertising. As for GameFan Magazine, the mag responsible for the "Best Game Ever" quote on the back cover of FFVII, I've posted info about it at least twice, namely that it was basically a front for a chain of gaming stores in California.


What you have to see if FF7 has proven to be mediocre by people who post at this forum.


Time and again, Shriners have put together very solid arguments detailing FFVII's flaws. The best I've seen in FFVII's defense (on FFS) is the disproof of plot-hole theories and "magazines give it high reviews!"


The numbers dont lie and the ridiculing is not needed.

What numbers? I surely hope you're not trying to say FFVII was so wonderful because of its popularity. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, I'll assume you mean the scores given it by all these credible reviews you trumpet about. That's all well and good, but you contradict yourself when you say...


Its up to the person to decide if they will take that into account.

This is gonna be a heck of a long post...



The name-calling comes from the fact that you repeat the same bullshit over and over without directly confronting the points placed in front of you.

You know damn well that there is no actual documented proof of it. That's because it's a practice that is largely accepted in several different industries. In Hollywood, there's an exceptionally good example called the Academy Awards. Everyone knows the winners are basically determined by how much money studios donate to the Academy.

The music industry works similarly. It's a big system of money changing hands to facilitate a "I'll scratch your back and you scratch mine" mentality. If you really want to dispute these claims, the burden of proof is on you.



You're a proven moron, so agreeing with him only hurts his cause. Thanks very much!



Logical inferences are not enough? Many of the world's greatest mysteries have been solved through the application of logic in the absence of physical evidence. Try again.



I can't speak for anyone else, but my problem is actually with the fanbase and the company that made the game. The game itself is simply a mediocre product that would otherwise be beneath my notice, were it not for the attention it garners from those who have no idea what they're talking about.



The only credible reviewers (of pretty much anything) are the independent ones who make no money from their reviews and are capable of making a completely objective anaysis of a product. Otherwise, they fall into the aforementioned system of money-moving.



You have missed a major point. It's not about making excuses to discredit the reviews. It's about explaining the reasons for the high scores to tie in with and strengthen our own arguments.

If reviews were the ultimate be-all and end-all of a discussion on the subject, it would be over before it began. But then, where would that leave those of us who have legitimate complaints about the game? We would have to simply be dismissed as wrong and ignored. Only a lunatic would think that was proper.

Besides, why are so-called professional reviewers any better than us? Why do they know better than I do what makes a good game? They may do it for a living, but I've played quite a lot of games myself and am quite knowledgable. What's the difference? The difference is only in their employment. If I were to become a staff writer for a major gaming magazine tomorrow, would my views on gaming somehow become more legitimate overnight? Of course not.



Numbers do lie. They lie frequently about a lot of things, from corporate ledgers to weather forecasts to gaming reviews. They are as fallible as the people who write them.

Ridiculing is often necessary, actually. Reason cannot sway all people, so a kick in the ass is needed to rile them into engaging a discussion on the proper terms.



Actually, Halo 2 was an exceptional example of a game being overrated due to the advertising revenue it generated. Very few games have ever been so hotly disputed as it is. That kind of conflict does not come out of nowhere. There are obviously many valid complaints that were not reflected in the game's reviews.

And just so everyone knows exactly what the hell I'm talking about when I refer to money changing hands, I'll explain the process. When a game is released, publishers spend money to advertise it. They put ads in magazines, websites, and sometimes even on television. These, of course, cost money, which goes to the media outlets that are running the ads. Now, in the cases of games which are advertised particularly heavily, with huge pop-up flash ads on websites and multi-page foldouts in magazines, that is a LOT of money. And where that much money is moved, relationships develop. If someone is willing to spend that much money, then the recipient wants to make it as likely as possible that they'll receive more. Therefore, when it comes to reviewing products, they do it as kindly as possible to make the publisher more inclined to spend more money advertising with them.

It's a very simple and very obvious system, and no one with even an ounce of business knowledge could possibly believe that it doesn't happen frequently.

I can understand what you are saying from a business standpoint. It might happen in the gaming industry who knows. But my point is it can not be proven it happened in FF7s case. Is so I can safely assume it happens to any other game that is given high ratings? A game like oblivion that was given great ratings and the marketing may have not as big as FF7s, but was strong nonetheless. Were the good reviews given because of the reasons you and chunky have stated?

Ive never heard of this until people have tried to argue against FF7. That is my point. If this is a possible common thing in the industry, why hasnt it been pointed out for any other game?

Imagine that--another strawman built by iceberg. As far as I know, there isn't a giant conspiracy theory among FFVII-"haters" about Squeenix and/or Sony "paying off" gaming mags. What has been said repeatedly is that it would be in the best interests of said magazines to give FFVII positive reviews, seeing how much Sony and/or Squeenix put into advertising. As for GameFan Magazine, the mag responsible for the "Best Game Ever" quote on the back cover of FFVII, I've posted info about it at least twice, namely that it was basically a front for a chain of gaming stores in California.



Time and again, Shriners have put together very solid arguments detailing FFVII's flaws. The best I've seen in FFVII's defense (on FFS) is the disproof of plot-hole theories and "magazines give it high reviews!"



What numbers? I surely hope you're not trying to say FFVII was so wonderful because of its popularity. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, I'll assume you mean the scores given it by all these credible reviews you trumpet about. That's all well and good, but you contradict yourself when you say...

So its safe to assume a game like halo 2, which was heavily marketed, was only given good reviews because it would be in the best interest of the magazines and websites who review it? Or is that just the case with FF7?

What numbers? The reviews. I did not contradict myself at all.

But IGN did, and by standing by them, you contradict yourself as well.

I understand that point but saying that is really saying that everyone who is a credible reviewer is wrong.

I honestly didn't mean to imply that at all. I'm sure there must a number of credible reviewers who've looked at that game in an objective manner and have reached reasonable conclusions. It just seems to me sadly that the number of those are much smaller than the one's who get their information wrong.


I really find it hard to see why it was given such a high rating from the majority of reviewers if its a mediocre game.

Admittedly I don't have as much background knowledge, or facts to hand, on this as some of the others in here, so probably can't give you as good an answer as them.

However it's common knowledge, i'm sure amongst most of us, that while the game isn't exactly great it was certainly designed to appeal to many people before it's release. The characters were made easy to understand, there were alot of flashy special effects, the backgrounds and people were designed in 3-D for the first time, plot ideas which had already worked well in other games/stories were re-used in conjunction with these things. None of these aspects were enough to make the game good, but certainly they were enough to make the game popular, which was Square's aim from the start in order to make their money.

You may doubt some of that, but then considering the heavy advertising of the game just before it's release, doesn't it strike you that perhaps Square were just a little desperate at the time to get this game noticed? Is the idea of Square bribing magazines behind closed doors really so impossible if you really think about it? So much depended on their success with that game at that time. If they'd failed it would have been bad for both their reputation and for their profit making.

This is gonna be a heck of a long post...


Oh so we are not going to attempt to act like adults here? First name calling then what, you're going to pinch me? Come on grow up.

Ok if square paid of magazines to give FF7 good reviews, where is the proof of that? Thats what Im saying, that statement can not be proved and leads to my point of people saying anything to discredit the game. What didnt you understand?

The name-calling comes from the fact that you repeat the same bullshit over and over without directly confronting the points placed in front of you.

You know damn well that there is no actual documented proof of it. That's because it's a practice that is largely accepted in several different industries. In Hollywood, there's an exceptionally good example called the Academy Awards. Everyone knows the winners are basically determined by how much money studios donate to the Academy.

The music industry works similarly. It's a big system of money changing hands to facilitate a "I'll scratch your back and you scratch mine" mentality. If you really want to dispute these claims, the burden of proof is on you.


Finally someone who talks with some common sense and doesnt just flame unneccesarily.I definetly agree with Bizzle.

You're a proven moron, so agreeing with him only hurts his cause. Thanks very much!


Can anyone prove that theory about square paying people off? If not then it holds no relevance.

Logical inferences are not enough? Many of the world's greatest mysteries have been solved through the application of logic in the absence of physical evidence. Try again.


Is the problem you have with FF7 against its fanbase? Or against the game itself...?

I can't speak for anyone else, but my problem is actually with the fanbase and the company that made the game. The game itself is simply a mediocre product that would otherwise be beneath my notice, were it not for the attention it garners from those who have no idea what they're talking about.


I understand that point but saying that is really saying that everyone who is a credible reviewer is wrong. I really find it hard to see why it was given such a high rating from the majority of reviewers if its a mediocre game. There were a lot of things that could have been fixed in the game, but with every game there is always room for improvement. The game is definitley above any average rpg.

The only credible reviewers (of pretty much anything) are the independent ones who make no money from their reviews and are capable of making a completely objective anaysis of a product. Otherwise, they fall into the aforementioned system of money-moving.


Its just funny how Ive never seen any other game's scores in question as much as I see FF7's. The general consensus of this forum seems to lead toward calling each positive FF7 reviewer a fanboy or even say that they are bias. And these are people who play game and review them for a living. I find it really funny. I respect anyone's opinions. So if you were to say hey that game sucks and state reasons, I respect that. And Ive seen may shriners do that. But to make up excuse after excuse for the high scores of FF7 is really silly. Dont you think? Honestly?

You have missed a major point. It's not about making excuses to discredit the reviews. It's about explaining the reasons for the high scores to tie in with and strengthen our own arguments.

If reviews were the ultimate be-all and end-all of a discussion on the subject, it would be over before it began. But then, where would that leave those of us who have legitimate complaints about the game? We would have to simply be dismissed as wrong and ignored. Only a lunatic would think that was proper.

Besides, why are so-called professional reviewers any better than us? Why do they know better than I do what makes a good game? They may do it for a living, but I've played quite a lot of games myself and am quite knowledgable. What's the difference? The difference is only in their employment. If I were to become a staff writer for a major gaming magazine tomorrow, would my views on gaming somehow become more legitimate overnight? Of course not.


The numbers dont lie and the ridiculing is not needed.

Numbers do lie. They lie frequently about a lot of things, from corporate ledgers to weather forecasts to gaming reviews. They are as fallible as the people who write them.

Ridiculing is often necessary, actually. Reason cannot sway all people, so a kick in the ass is needed to rile them into engaging a discussion on the proper terms.


So its safe to assume a game like halo 2, which was heavily marketed, was only given good reviews because it would be in the best interest of the magazines and websites who review it? Or is that just the case with FF7?

Actually, Halo 2 was an exceptional example of a game being overrated due to the advertising revenue it generated. Very few games have ever been so hotly disputed as it is. That kind of conflict does not come out of nowhere. There are obviously many valid complaints that were not reflected in the game's reviews.

And just so everyone knows exactly what the hell I'm talking about when I refer to money changing hands, I'll explain the process. When a game is released, publishers spend money to advertise it. They put ads in magazines, websites, and sometimes even on television. These, of course, cost money, which goes to the media outlets that are running the ads. Now, in the cases of games which are advertised particularly heavily, with huge pop-up flash ads on websites and multi-page foldouts in magazines, that is a LOT of money. And where that much money is moved, relationships develop. If someone is willing to spend that much money, then the recipient wants to make it as likely as possible that they'll receive more. Therefore, when it comes to reviewing products, they do it as kindly as possible to make the publisher more inclined to spend more money advertising with them.

It's a very simple and very obvious system, and no one with even an ounce of business knowledge could possibly believe that it doesn't happen frequently.

there is no actual documented proof of it. That's because it's a practice that is largely accepted in several different industries.

Have to admit that possibility didn't occur to me before.

I guess that does make sense thinking about it, though then again you do get people who secretly work within organizations to spy on their practices on behalf of a competitor in return for large amounts of money. I'm suprised none of Square's competitor's ever did the dirty on them in that way and publicly expose them in order to damage their reputation. Still I suppose most of them are just as guilty of the same crime when it comes to their products which could perhaps be why that's never happened.

Why are FFVII's reviews so important again?

If it's for sake of discussion between opinions over whether or not FFVII is good or bad, or either enough to be considered for a remake, then what about FFVII's actual story quality/rating(like movie ratings..) and target genre and the difference between the classics? Because actually almost every FF before and after VII seems to be totally traditional compared to it. But maybe that's a sketchy point I shouldn't make, seeing as even though there are medieval themes in later series they have a modern and future modern feel to them as compared to the classics. FFVII just seems like some city-greasy novel instead of the more whole-hearted justice-based motif in most series.

I guess that does make sense thinking about it, though then again you do get people who secretly work within organizations to spy on their practices on behalf of a competitor in return for large amounts of money. I'm suprised none of Square's competitor's ever did the dirty on them in that way and publicly expose them in order to damage their reputation.

The process Prak is describing isn't so much an overt bribe by Sony/Squeenix/whoever, but a "here, I'll scratch your back, now you scratch mine" deal. Thus, such a spy thing wouldn't exactly be, well, effective.


Why are FFVII's reviews so important again?

They're really not important. However, FFVII's stalwart defenders bring up the reviews over and over again--thus, the discussion.

The process Prak is describing isn't so much an overt bribe by Sony/Squeenix/whoever, but a "here, I'll scratch your back, now you scratch mine" deal. Thus, such a spy thing wouldn't exactly be, well, effective.


Yup, I realised that ;)

It just suprises me that there hasn't been at least one competitor of Square's who were threatened enough by their success, at some stage, to try and do the dirty on them in the way I described. While admittedly alot of companies take the "I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine" attitude towards each other, there are others who'll quite happily take the chance of making a competitor look bad if it's to their own gain.

Still then again I've only got a limited amount of knowledge on that type of situation, so probably am not the best person to judge.

Yup, I realised that ;)

It just suprises me that there hasn't been at least one competitor of Square's who were threatened enough by their success, at some stage, to try and do the dirty on them in the way I described. While admittedly alot of companies take the "I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine" attitude towards each other, there are others who'll quite happily take the chance of making a competitor look bad if it's to their own gain.

Still then again I've only got a limited amount of knowledge on that type of situation, so probably am not the best person to judge.


This might be the case if it actually happened. Its not proven.

This might be the case if it actually happened. Its not proven.

Admittedly, I can't say how much/how little that situation occurs with companies within the gaming industry without evidence. However, on a more general note, certainly it's a situation which occurs in business. Something along those lines once happened at a company I used to work for, with a member of staff who worked in my department. It led to him being dismissed. I've also read articles on the subject from various sources. While not all cases can be proved, company spying does happen.

Admittedly, I can't say how much/how little that situation occurs with companies within the gaming industry without evidence. However, on a more general note, certainly it's a situation which occurs in business. Something along those lines once happened at a company I used to work for, with a member of staff who worked in my department. It led to him being dismissed. I've also read articles on the subject from various sources. While not all cases can be proved, company spying does happen.

Im sure company spying does occur lol. I read your post wrong sorry

Im sure company spying does occur lol. I read your post wrong sorry

No worries ;)

Iceberg, it's extremely unfair and downright silly to dismiss the argument that the aforementioned "backscratching" occurred in relation to FFVII's good reviews. The fact that there is no documented proof that things like this happened is beside the point. Prak is not trying to convict Square Enix of a crime. Reasonable doubt does not play into effect because there is nothing at stake here and there is no defendant. There's reasonable doubt that you aren't an Square producer trying to sway opinion in favor of FFVII. It's highly improbable, but there's no documented proof, and why should the benefit of every doubt go to your side of the argument?

You should know that there is no way to predict how popular a game is going to be unless it's a sequel that fans are already trying to get pirated copies of six months before its release date. Similarly, there is no way of explaining with certainty the reason why a mediocre game received good reviews. The "backscratching" idea makes a lot of sense, so why should it be dismissed simply because it isn't documented? If I told you I was 18 years old as part of an argument, you wouldn't go saying "Give me a birth certificate, motherfucker, or your point is invalid!"

Also, you have way too much faith in the media if you believe critics are objective. I don't need to say any more about that.

Iceberg, it's extremely unfair and downright silly to dismiss the argument that the aforementioned "backscratching" occurred in relation to FFVII's good reviews. The fact that there is no documented proof that things like this happened is beside the point. Prak is not trying to convict Square Enix of a crime. Reasonable doubt does not play into effect because there is nothing at stake here and there is no defendant. There's reasonable doubt that you aren't an Square producer trying to sway opinion in favor of FFVII. It's highly improbable, but there's no documented proof, and why should the benefit of every doubt go to your side of the argument?

You should know that there is no way to predict how popular a game is going to be unless it's a sequel that fans are already trying to get pirated copies of six months before its release date. Similarly, there is no way of explaining with certainty the reason why a mediocre game received good reviews. The "backscratching" idea makes a lot of sense, so why should it be dismissed simply because it isn't documented? If I told you I was 18 years old as part of an argument, you wouldn't go saying "Give me a birth certificate, motherfucker, or your point is invalid!"

Also, you have way too much faith in the media if you believe critics are objective. I don't need to say any more about that.

We dont know if this happened, but everyone seems to be adopting the idea that such did occur. I dont think its fair to the game (FF7) to say something like this happened. Why isnt this being discussed in cases of other highly rated games? The fact that the game recieved great reviews can not be accepeted. And I just find it funny that out of all the games that are discussed at this forum, this is the first time this has ever been mentioned. Its just a coincidence that it just so happened to be brought up in a FF7 discussion. It just seems a little funny.

FFVII is one of the most overrated games in history...and as for the notion that the high ratings of other games weren't questioned, i believe the Halo games were discussed to some extent in these forums
but the point you brought up isn't the funny part...it's the fact that you're totally giving SquareEnix a blowjob by defending this shitty game like it's the best thing since sliced bread, when from any angle it's clearly not
if you ask for evidence, go back and read the entire thread from the beginning

i believe the Halo games were discussed to some extent in these forums
but the point you brought up isn't the funny part

iceberg himself brought up Halo 2, asking if it received the same benefit that FFVII apparently got, and apparently, when he didn't get the answer he was looking for, and the point was immediately dropped.

but the point you brought up isn't the funny part...it's the fact that you're totally giving SquareEnix a blowjob by defending this shitty game like it's the best thing since sliced bread, when from any angle it's clearly not
if you ask for evidence, go back and read the entire thread from the beginning

FF VII is overrated and given way more credit than it deserves but it is not at all a shitty game.

It's a mediocre game, at best. Why do you keep defending it?

Have to admit I don't think there's anything wrong with that, so long as the person defending the game presents their argument in an intelligent way. A good example I think is Desert Wolf. He's a fan of the game, but makes the effort to present his reasons in a logical and sensible way.

It's people who come out with back up statements such as 'It's my favourite in the series because it's the only one i've played' or 'it's the best because Cloud kicked ass' that I have limited patience with.

Have to admit I don't think there's anything wrong with that, so long as the person defending the game presents their argument in an intelligent way. A good example I think is Desert Wolf. He's a fan of the game, but makes the effort to present his reasons in a logical and sensible way.

It's people who come out with back up statements such as 'It's my favourite in the series because it's the only one i've played' or 'it's the best because Cloud kicked ass' that I have limited patience with.

i agree...to some extent...i have NO patience with those people, in most cases you're better off arguing with a brick wall than with those hopeless fanatics
reason, logic, and evidence are things i always try to get from them but all i get is STFU and GTHO...they then proceed to go home and jack-off because their one-sided mindset keeps them from having relationships with girls that don't have the last name .gif, .jpg, or .png

XD!!!
>>
I'm sure there's SOME hopf for the fanatics...even though they might not seem like they're listening to you, I think most of them are just too stubborn to let it show that they agree with you....
I think most of them are really actually thinking of what you said....even if they're angry or reluctant about it.....


It's a mediocre game, at best. Why do you keep defending it?

I defend the game because it's something I love. =] I think that the fanboys, no matter how dumb they might seem, are just doing the same thing...so sometimes I kind of feel the need to defend them, too....
People are sometimes stubborn when they defend things they love...>> And as they say, "Love makes people do stupid things."

We dont know if this happened, but everyone seems to be adopting the idea that such did occur. I dont think its fair to the game (FF7) to say something like this happened. Why isnt this being discussed in cases of other highly rated games? The fact that the game recieved great reviews can not be accepeted. And I just find it funny that out of all the games that are discussed at this forum, this is the first time this has ever been mentioned. Its just a coincidence that it just so happened to be brought up in a FF7 discussion. It just seems a little funny.

Tell me where in my post that I stated that the "backscratching" was going on. I didn't. But you can't force everyone to assume it isn't happening just because it isn't proven.

The idea is merely a speculation as to why the game received good reviews. I think Prak's idea sounds logical, but I also believe it's because FFVII can be a very likeable game, despite its lack of proper character development and poorly connected plot. Also, if you read the review at the beginning of this thread, the author does not even take a critical stance on the game. He merely mentions all the things he enjoyed about the game, something that's fine for a reviewer to do, but it has no critical relevancy in the quality of the game.

What bothers me is that you seem to act as though the supreme authority of reviewers, people I often have little respect for anyway, trumps all our arguments just because they said so.

It's a mediocre game, at best. Why do you keep defending it?

This is the first time i've said something about it in this thread, so to ask why i keep defending it would be false. I do agree that it has flaws and is overrated but it is not mediocre at best. If it was mediocre at best (and i assume you were stating that like it was a fact) it would not have become so popular and loved by so many people. A game cannot succeed unless it's good, no matter how large of a reputation or how much advertisement the series has. Games like Devil May Cry 2 and Dirge of Cerebrus have proven this.


It's people who come out with back up statements such as 'It's my favourite in the series because it's the only one i've played' or 'it's the best because Cloud kicked ass' that I have limited patience with.

agreed

iceberg himself brought up Halo 2, asking if it received the same benefit that FFVII apparently got, and apparently, when he didn't get the answer he was looking for, and the point was immediately dropped.

I think your're missing my point. I'm not so much defending how great
the game is. What I'm saying is because the game was reviewed so highly,
people are throwing aligations of money being passed, companies
scratching each others backs etc.....in order to discredit the game.
What I'm saying is why can't it be excepted that the game was reviewed
so highly was because the people who wrote these articles actually
enjoyed the game? Do you guys really hate the game sooo much that you'll
say whatever to make it look bad. If you don't like the game that's fine
with me, like I said I know you guys have plenty of arguments, I just
feel this money excuse is a bit silly.

Now to satisfy chunky because he's seems to love me so much, I wasn't
defending halo. All I asked was a huge majority of reviews halo 2
received were positive. Would it be safe to assume that the same
happened to halo as what was discussed for ff7? Did bungie pay money or
scratch someones back per se to make the game get said reviews? That
question was not answered. I actually don't play halo. I bought the game
thought the single player was so so. The multiplayer is its strongest
point and I do give it tons of credit for presenting one of the most lag
free online experiences I've played. I think the game is over rated but
that's my taste because I wasn't a huge fan of halo 1 like everyone else
was. So I'm not sure what you think you're reading but pay more
attention. Now did I answer everything I was supposed to?

What I'm saying is why can't it be excepted that the game was reviewed so highly was because the people who wrote these articles actually enjoyed the game?

Because that's the way business works. If you'd take your own advice and think about the things others are saying instead of blindly sticking to your own ignorant and worthless opinions, you might learn something.


Do you guys really hate the game sooo much that you'll
say whatever to make it look bad. If you don't like the game that's fine
with me, like I said I know you guys have plenty of arguments, I just
feel this money excuse is a bit silly.

You also can't disprove it. That is because it is correct. The same thing happens all the time with all kinds of different games. Hell, look at GTA: San Andreas for a great example of an obviously inferior product getting superior reviews. People actually gave it perfect ratings in the graphics category despite the fact that the draw distance was horrible and scenery tended to not render properly fairly constantly. The reviewers would have to be utter morons to miss those glaring flaws, and I don't think that's the case. I can probably come up with dozens of other examples of it if you really want to press the issue. Even if you don't regard a couple examples as proof, with enough repetition, an undeniable pattern emerges.

Because that's the way business works. If you'd take your own advice and think about the things others are saying instead of blindly sticking to your own ignorant and worthless opinions, you might learn something.



You also can't disprove it. That is because it is correct. The same thing happens all the time with all kinds of different games. Hell, look at GTA: San Andreas for a great example of an obviously inferior product getting superior reviews. People actually gave it perfect ratings in the graphics category despite the fact that the draw distance was horrible and scenery tended to not render properly fairly constantly. The reviewers would have to be utter morons to miss those glaring flaws, and I don't think that's the case. I can probably come up with dozens of other examples of it if you really want to press the issue. Even if you don't regard a couple examples as proof, with enough repetition, an undeniable pattern emerges.

If it was proven Id accept it. Trust me, your opinion means shit to me. I could care less. Its not proven therefore not relevant and another stretch for you guys who hate the game so much to try and try to bring the game down. You especially always preach "wheres the proof" and "back it up". You cant? Stop with it.

Graphics aside, GTA SA was a great game. Graphics arent everything and I think you know that. It got the reviews it deserved.

Responding to Prak disproves any and all argument of indifference towards any dissenting opinion you may argue against.

Because that's the way business works. If you'd take your own advice and think about the things others are saying instead of blindly sticking to your own ignorant and worthless opinions, you might learn something.



You also can't disprove it. That is because it is correct. The same thing happens all the time with all kinds of different games. Hell, look at GTA: San Andreas for a great example of an obviously inferior product getting superior reviews. People actually gave it perfect ratings in the graphics category despite the fact that the draw distance was horrible and scenery tended to not render properly fairly constantly. The reviewers would have to be utter morons to miss those glaring flaws, and I don't think that's the case. I can probably come up with dozens of other examples of it if you really want to press the issue. Even if you don't regard a couple examples as proof, with enough repetition, an undeniable pattern emerges.


Take your own advice. Maybe you're wrong here. You cant always be right no matter how stubborn you might be.

Responding to Prak disproves any and all argument of indifference towards any dissenting opinion you may argue against.


Um so you kiss his ass?


Oh wait, just for the record, FF12 is getting some great reviews. Hmmmmm I wonder what that means????

Oh wait, just for the record, FF12 is getting some great reviews. Hmmmmm I wonder what that means????

Its a great game. I say this from personal expierence as well.

If it was proven Id accept it. Trust me, your opinion means shit to me. I could care less. Its not proven therefore not relevant and another stretch for you guys who hate the game so much to try and try to bring the game down. You especially always preach "wheres the proof" and "back it up". You cant? Stop with it.

Graphics aside, GTA SA was a great game. Graphics arent everything and I think you know that. It got the reviews it deserved.

I think the main point being made there Iceberg, at the risk of putting words in Praks mouth, was that while there's actually nothing in print to prove that such cases with game reviewers happen, the fact that games are so regularly given more credit than they deserve, in cases when things are too obviously wrong with them for anyone to miss, no matter how much they might like the game, indicates there's other reasons behind some of the things that magazine reviewers have said, other than just a personal liking of the game.

Patterns of behaviour, can count as a type of evidence to pinpoint a situation if you look at things from a logical point of view. For example take money stealing. Say that when you went to your job each day, you hung your jacket up in a particular place before starting work. Then imagine if at the end of your working day, when going to grab it just before heading home, you discovered change missing out of your pocket. You know there's no hole in the pocket, and that you zipped it up that morning before leaving your jacket where you did. You'd think it was pretty strange that you had money missing, even though you didn't actually see anybody take it.

Then imagine if this started happening on a daily basis. Would it not be a reasonable conclusion to come to that your money was being stolen, even though you'd have no proof as to who it was or the exact time the stealing took place? Logically there would be no other explanation.

Take your own advice. Maybe you're wrong here. You cant always be right no matter how stubborn you might be.

Unless you are capable of actually proving him wrong, you're nothing but a moron spouting pure fanboy vitriol.


Um so you kiss his ass?

No, that applies to anyone, I just mentioned prak as an example for this case.

Mm.
There's nothing wrong with Prak being correct. >> But the people here always seem to be very "a-hole-ish" about themselves being correct. >=(
I speak this by experience. There are few times that people simply reply, "Oh! I see...thank you." People often argue instead.... So people do find something offensive here. But....Hm.

I mean, you rude troll-guys are RIGHT! You don't have to be so "a-hole-ish" about it...being correct is something that you should be glad about!! And it's a wonderful thing to be able to share truth to those that are in the dark...it's nothing to be rude and cynical about....>>

If it was proven Id accept it. Trust me, your opinion means shit to me. I could care less. Its not proven therefore not relevant and another stretch for you guys who hate the game so much to try and try to bring the game down. You especially always preach "wheres the proof" and "back it up". You cant? Stop with it.

As I've said before, logic based on rational observations and detection of patterns is a form of proof. Perhaps even the most reliable one. If you will not acknowledge this, you are nothing more than a scared fanboy desperately clinging to your singular hope of defying me, regardless of how ridiculous it is.


Graphics aside, GTA SA was a great game. Graphics arent everything and I think you know that. It got the reviews it deserved.

I can very easily pick apart a lot of its aspects, actually. In fact, there's no chance that I would give the game anything more than a 7.5 out of 10. I used the graphics as a very specific example to prove a very specific point, however, and I notice that you did not attempt to counter that point. If you still had any credibility left, you would have just lost it all.


Take your own advice. Maybe you're wrong here. You cant always be right no matter how stubborn you might be.

You'd be surprised how often a person like me can be right. Try thinking rationally a bit more often and you'll start to see the sense in the things I say. As it stands, you are just another worthless fankid of the type we see in here all the time, mock for a while, and never miss when you're gone.


Oh wait, just for the record, FF12 is getting some great reviews. Hmmmmm I wonder what that means????

I've pointed out some flaws in another thread that no one seems to be addressing in reviews. FFXII has had a tremendous amount of advertising money backing it, so it's no surprise at all. I'm not saying it's a bad game by any means, but it is not the perfect instant classic so many reviewers are making it out to be.

Of course, you can always counter this by acknowledging that I'm a better reviewer than most of these so-called professionals. I'll probably be smug enough about that to let the real reason for it drop.

As I've said before, logic based on rational observations and detection of patterns is a form of proof. Perhaps even the most reliable one. If you will not acknowledge this, you are nothing more than a scared fanboy desperately clinging to your singular hope of defying me, regardless of how ridiculous it is.



I can very easily pick apart a lot of its aspects, actually. In fact, there's no chance that I would give the game anything more than a 7.5 out of 10. I used the graphics as a very specific example to prove a very specific point, however, and I notice that you did not attempt to counter that point. If you still had any credibility left, you would have just lost it all.



You'd be surprised how often a person like me can be right. Try thinking rationally a bit more often and you'll start to see the sense in the things I say. As it stands, you are just another worthless fankid of the type we see in here all the time, mock for a while, and never miss when you're gone.



I've pointed out some flaws in another thread that no one seems to be addressing in reviews. FFXII has had a tremendous amount of advertising money backing it, so it's no surprise at all. I'm not saying it's a bad game by any means, but it is not the perfect instant classic so many reviewers are making it out to be.

Of course, you can always counter this by acknowledging that I'm a better reviewer than most of these so-called professionals. I'll probably be smug enough about that to let the real reason for it drop.

Like I said no proof, its bullshit!!!! That simple Theres no response for the high reviews so you start these crazy aligations.

"If you will not acknowledge this, you are nothing more than a scared fanboy desperately clinging to your singular hope of defying me, regardless of how ridiculous it is." Come on listen to yourself. Its ridiculous.


Go ahead, pick GTA apart. Great game!!!! Enough said.

I havent played FF12 enough to actually say classic or not or even best FF but so far its a great game. And no you are not better than the pro reviewers. Its funny how you think your're hot shit cause you bully 10 year olds on a forum. I mean if thats what makes you happy more power to you. Its not that serious buddy.

Unless you are capable of actually proving him wrong, you're nothing but a moron spouting pure fanboy vitriol.



No, that applies to anyone, I just mentioned prak as an example for this case.


Can you prove him right? No, so then your're a pure ass kisser.

Fine...! Ignore me!!
I don't care...!

Hmf. At least now I know why everyone around here's so offensive....
People ignore you here if you aren't...
:o

Well I can be offensive, too!
Watch!

I HATE you guys!!! You...you MOLDY CINNAMON BUNS!!!!

Okay, bizzle--you've added nothing but peanut gallery comments to the discussion, which were little more than cheap potshots. And iceberg, you're just full of crap. With your help, a pattern has been established of highly popular, highly advertised games getting much better reviews than they deserve, often (if not always) by publications that are getting a piece of that advertisement pie. It may not be the smoking gun you're demanding with dozens of exclamation points (apparently, more exclamation points=more fanboy cred!!!!), but for those of us who actually think on occasion, patterns have a bit of meaning. And since you probably didn't pick it up, three examples (that's not counting FFXII, or one or two that I can think of) do make a pattern. So instead of countering the argument, you bring up your own "crazy aligations," which are just personal attacks instead of having really anything to do with the discussion at hand.

Like I said no proof, its bullshit!!!! That simple Theres no response for the high reviews so you start these crazy aligations.

"If you will not acknowledge this, you are nothing more than a scared fanboy desperately clinging to your singular hope of defying me, regardless of how ridiculous it is." Come on listen to yourself. Its ridiculous.


Go ahead, pick GTA apart. Great game!!!! Enough said.

I havent played FF12 enough to actually say classic or not or even best FF but so far its a great game. And no you are not better than the pro reviewers. Its funny how you think your're hot shit cause you bully 10 year olds on a forum. I mean if thats what makes you happy more power to you. Its not that serious buddy.

i find it funny that you're so easily riled into argument...i am as well but not to your degree

for the record, the lack of flaws in reviews don't mean that they're not there

prak HAS placed the flaws of the game thus far but has not presented them in this thread due to the fact that they're not relevant to the thread topic

back on subject, FFVII was one of the most (if not THE most) overrated game in history and will continue to be so long as there are masses of fanboys who fail to see anything out of their sad, hopeless lives

do us a favor Iceberg and get laid, it'll change you for the better...good luck...you're gonna need it

Fine...! Ignore me!!
I don't care...!

Hmf. At least now I know why everyone around here's so offensive....
People ignore you here if you aren't...
:o

Well I can be offensive, too!
Watch!

I HATE you guys!!! You...you MOLDY CINNAMON BUNS!!!!

Without actually meaning to sound offensive NorseFTX just what is your problem?

Just because you post in a thread doesn't mean that you're going to get attention every time. If somebody thinks that what somebody else has said in a post is interesting enough to respond to, they respond to it. If on the other hand there's nothing in that person's post that people want to respond to they won't.

If you honestly think that every time you make a post, that people are going to reply to you then sorry but afraid thats something that just doesn't happen on internet forums like this one. Grow up and accept it. :rolleyes:

Can you prove him right? No, so then your're a pure ass kisser.

I don't need to, he's right from the moment you started arguing with him.

Like I said no proof, its bullshit!!!! That simple Theres no response for the high reviews so you start these crazy aligations.

"If you will not acknowledge this, you are nothing more than a scared fanboy desperately clinging to your singular hope of defying me, regardless of how ridiculous it is." Come on listen to yourself. Its ridiculous.


Go ahead, pick GTA apart. Great game!!!! Enough said.

I havent played FF12 enough to actually say classic or not or even best FF but so far its a great game. And no you are not better than the pro reviewers. Its funny how you think your're hot shit cause you bully 10 year olds on a forum. I mean if thats what makes you happy more power to you. Its not that serious buddy.

Maybe if you cut with the vitriol and actually start DISCUSSING those games instead of going into moronic ad hominems, then you might be viewed with a little more credibility and less contempt.

I really have to wonder what iceberg and bizzle are trying to accomplish here. They must know that they're not going to convince anyone of anything, especially considering that they have no arguments to counter the things that have been presented by their opposition. It's like all they're doing is stubbornly clinging to their idiotic beliefs out of spite, which makes them even more pathetic than the ones who do it because they're just plain stupid.

NorseFTX, we've heard it before and don't feel obligated to say anything to you this time. The community has existed in this same form for a long time. It's pretty silly to think a few words from you might change anything, especially when we like the way things are.

<<
I'm not even entirely sure what people are discussing here....
What I notice the most are "do yourself a favor and get laid", and "don't you have anything better to do than bully 10 year olds?" and "cut the ad hominems"....>>
You guys are...talking about reviews, right?
Hmm.....
"Reviews are the reviewer's account of the game, and sometimes may reflect only the personal enjoyment of the reviewer. A review is not necessarily a critique."



Without actually meaning to sound offensive NorseFTX just what is your problem?

Just because you post in a thread doesn't mean that you're going to get attention every time. If somebody thinks that what somebody else has said in a post is interesting enough to respond to, they respond to it. If on the other hand there's nothing in that person's post that people want to respond to they won't.

If you honestly think that every time you make a post, that people are going to reply to you then sorry but afraid thats something that just doesn't happen on internet forums like this one. Grow up and accept it. :rolleyes:

All right then.
Please excuse me....
I don't really think you guys are moldy cinnamon buns. >>


NorseFTX, we've heard it before and don't feel obligated to say anything to you this time. The community has existed in this same form for a long time. It's pretty silly to think a few words from you might change anything, especially when we like the way things are.

Hm. All I'm saying is that you seem to be bothered by all the fanboys being pissed off at you....but since people have become pissed off at you so many times on a regular basis, then the fault might not be exclusively theirs--maybe there's something you guys are doing wrong, too.

Any "review" that only reflects the personal enjoyment of the writer is nothing more than a rant. A review is meant to be as neutral as possible, illustrating both the good and bad in a product for the purpose of helping others make informed decisions.

Also, most of us are not bothered by fankids. They're going to show up here no matter what we do, so we prefer to make sport of them instead of letting them shit up the place without fear of reprisal.

A review is not necessarily a critique.

Uh. Yeah, that's exactly what it's supposed to be. An objective critique of a game, movie, book, TV show, et cetera, so that others can make informed decisions with their time and/or money.


Hm. All I'm saying is that you seem to be bothered by all the fanboys being pissed off at you....but since people have become pissed off at you so many times on a regular basis, then the fault might not be exclusively theirs--maybe there's something you guys are doing wrong, too.

I don't get bothered by fanboys when they get riled at me--I'm pretty sure Prak doesn't, either. In fact, it's quite the opposite. I find it quite amusing.

edit: I really wasn't repeating Prak--I'm just a slow poster. Honest!

haha you said the exact same thing I did!

LoL, I know. Great minds?

XD
Mm--I was going to add that, but I decided not to...XP maybe I should have....
Though reviews sometimes are just the reviewer's personal experience and not a critique, a review SHOULD be a critique.

I was just saying that it sometimes isn't the case....>>

This is what I meant by my earlier post: "All reviews written by reviewers are reviews. An objective, non-personal one is a critique. A personal, subjective one is not a critique, but it is still a review."
As Prak put it, the latter would be a "rant". >>
So a "review" is a larger category that can be divided into subcategores: "critique" and "rant".

And about fankids, I think it's better to teach them not to shit up places rather than make sport out of them....>>
People yell and act drastically if they feel as if the other side isn't understanding them--that they aren't expressing themselves correctly...so they start taking extreme measures....it usually is detrimental, though....
And it wouldn't be amusing, at least to me, if someone started taking these sort of extreme measures towards me....because that'd mean that I just...don't get it. If this is the reason you find it amusing (The "Lol, what the heck are these people saying?" kind of amusing) then it's your own lack of understanding that you find amusing.
><
If this isn't the case, please let me know...
I don't want to misunderstand you guys, either....

You are very right about what a review is supposed to be, but go and read through the one posted at the beginning of this thread and see what a review is NOT supposed to be. The "review" posted is much more of a rant than an actual review, and that was the point I made.

Iceberg, you're using the most irritatingly stupid argument in favor of FFVII, and I don't necessarily mean this as an insult to you. As always, I shall use the "Lil' John Example" to illustrate my point.

Take the song "Get Low." You cannot possibly argue that there is near the amount of creativity and brilliance in this song as, say, Mozart's Requiem. Not only is there more difficulty involved in performing Mozart's music, it takes a great deal more knowledge of music to compose it, and it has survived over two and a half centuries.

However, I guarantee you that more people have heard "Get Low" than Requiem, and even some of my own friends would prefer listening to it. But none of them would argue that "Get Low" is a better piece of music because it's just some guy yelling "YEAH" and describing sex very bluntly and uninteligently.

Popularity and personal preferences have absolutely nothing to do with the quality of a game. If you don't acknowledge that, read the "Lil' John Example" over and over again until you do, or never try to argue in favor of FFVII again. You will be ignored.

I like FFVII, as I've said many times, but I acknowledge that it is an overrated game, it has very sloppy gameplay, and its storyline is very linear, lacking character development and proper plot twists.

Also, did you even pay any attention to what I said regarding the "backscratching"? The fact that you haven't responded to it leads me to believe you don't have a counter-argument and are still desperately holding on to that "you don't have proof" bullshit.


Like I said no proof, its bullshit!!!! That simple Theres no response for the high reviews so you start these crazy aligations.

Tell me where in my post that I stated that the "backscratching" was going on. I didn't. But you can't force everyone to assume it isn't happening just because it isn't proven.

You are very right about what a review is supposed to be, but go and read through the one posted at the beginning of this thread and see what a review is NOT supposed to be. The "review" posted is much more of a rant than an actual review, and that was the point I made.

Iceberg, you're using the most irritatingly stupid argument in favor of FFVII, and I don't necessarily mean this as an insult to you. As always, I shall use the "Lil' John Example" to illustrate my point.

Take the song "Get Low." You cannot possibly argue that there is near the amount of creativity and brilliance in this song as, say, Mozart's Requiem. Not only is there more difficulty involved in performing Mozart's music, it takes a great deal more knowledge of music to compose it, and it has survived over two and a half centuries.

However, I guarantee you that more people have heard "Get Low" than Requiem, and even some of my own friends would prefer listening to it. But none of them would argue that "Get Low" is a better piece of music because it's just some guy yelling "YEAH" and describing sex very bluntly and uninteligently.

Popularity and personal preferences have absolutely nothing to do with the quality of a game. If you don't acknowledge that, read the "Lil' John Example" over and over again until you do, or never try to argue in favor of FFVII again. You will be ignored.

I like FFVII, as I've said many times, but I acknowledge that it is an overrated game, it has very sloppy gameplay, and its storyline is very linear, lacking character development and proper plot twists.

Also, did you even pay any attention to what I said regarding the "backscratching"? The fact that you haven't responded to it leads me to believe you don't have a counter-argument and are still desperately holding on to that "you don't have proof" bullshit.


Its wasnt your post I was referring to. If I did sorry about that.

Comparing lil jon to Mozart is way off. Two totally different generations of listeners. A game doesnt have to have "plot twist" to have a good story.

Prak you're not clinging to your " BELIEF"? Its funny you used that word because its something you actually believe and cant actually prove. If it did happen and Im not saying that it didnt, Id apologize for all this. But, since there is no concrete evidence, I have the choice to follow your belief or not. I choose not to. Is there anything wrong with? Dont get upset because some people disagree with you. It happens from time to time. Ok?

What you guys dont understand was the link was not a REVIEW. Gamespot ocassionally adds games to its greatest games of all times list. This just so happened to be FF7s turn. Thats why it sounds like a rant.

Gamespot ocassionally adds games to its greatest games of all times list. This just so happened to be FF7s turn. Thats why it sounds like a rant.

The review was an even bigger rant, to be honest. I've read it, out of curiousity. Well. I read the first quarter of it--I couldn't stomach the reviewer giving Squeenix a deepthroat anymore.

edit: Here's the "review." (http://www.gamespot.com/ps/rpg/finalfantasy7/review.html)

And about fankids, I think it's better to teach them not to shit up places rather than make sport out of them....>>
People yell and act drastically if they feel as if the other side isn't understanding them--that they aren't expressing themselves correctly...so they start taking extreme measures....it usually is detrimental, though....
And it wouldn't be amusing, at least to me, if someone started taking these sort of extreme measures towards me....because that'd mean that I just...don't get it. If this is the reason you find it amusing (The "Lol, what the heck are these people saying?" kind of amusing) then it's your own lack of understanding that you find amusing.

As I mentioned before NorseFTX, sometimes explaining things to those people helps the situation but more often than not it doesn't. While at times it's certainly worth a try, it's not always the solution. Without meaning any offence, most of the regular's on here already know how to tell the difference between the people who are going to listen and who aren't going to listen. I know you mean well, but what you've said isn't going to change the way things generally work here. By all means if you want to try explaining how things are to those people, that's up to you but on the other hand it's also up to each and every member here how they deal with what others say in their posts.




Prak you're not clinging to your " BELIEF"? Its funny you used that word because its something you actually believe and cant actually prove. If it did happen and Im not saying that it didnt, Id apologize for all this. But, since there is no concrete evidence, I have the choice to follow your belief or not. I choose not to. Is there anything wrong with? Dont get upset because some people disagree with you. It happens from time to time. Ok?

Without meaning for this to come across as a direct answer on the behalf of anyone else, Iceberg did you read my previous post which gave an example of how it is that without concrete proof, it's possible to pin point a situation? You don't always need concrete proof to realise that it's going on. A regular pattern of events, taking all facts into account and looking at things from a logical point of view, is in itself a form of reliable evidence.

I think the main problem here Iceberg isn't that you're not agreeing with other people, but that you're not taking an open minded view on some of the things they've tried to explain to you, and as a result aren't discussing the differences in opinion in an open minded way. I think if you at least considered the possiblity that there might be some good reasons, not yet fully explained, behind the points people other people have made, you'd see that people aren't saying the things they are for personal reasons.

What Giga said, pretty much.

As I mentioned before NorseFTX, sometimes explaining things to those people helps the situation but more often than not it doesn't. While at times it's certainly worth a try, it's not always the solution. Without meaning any offence, most of the regular's on here already know how to tell the difference between the people who are going to listen and who aren't going to listen. I know you mean well, but what you've said isn't going to change the way things generally work here. By all means if you want to try explaining how things are to those people, that's up to you but on the other hand it's also up to each and every member here how they deal with what others say in their posts.

Alright...thank you then....
Thanks for your patience, too...

I suppose you'll deal with fanboys the way you do, and I'll deal with them the way I do.
Hm.
...>> I normally don't like to watch people be insulted without doing something about it myself, but I didn't realize that some of you enjoyed this, and I don't believe I have the right to take away your enjoyment, either....
So as long as I can be there to talk to the fanboys after you've had your fun, then I'll be alright....
<<
>>
Don't expect me not to complain once in a while, though! Especially if I think things get too out of hand....

As I mentioned before NorseFTX, sometimes explaining things to those people helps the situation but more often than not it doesn't. While at times it's certainly worth a try, it's not always the solution. Without meaning any offence, most of the regular's on here already know how to tell the difference between the people who are going to listen and who aren't going to listen. I know you mean well, but what you've said isn't going to change the way things generally work here. By all means if you want to try explaining how things are to those people, that's up to you but on the other hand it's also up to each and every member here how they deal with what others say in their posts.



Without meaning for this to come across as a direct answer on the behalf of anyone else, Iceberg did you read my previous post which gave an example of how it is that without concrete proof, it's possible to pin point a situation? You don't always need concrete proof to realise that it's going on. A regular pattern of events, taking all facts into account and looking at things from a logical point of view, is in itself a form of reliable evidence.

I think the main problem here Iceberg isn't that you're not agreeing with other people, but that you're not taking an open minded view on some of the things they've tried to explain to you, and as a result aren't discussing the differences in opinion in an open minded way. I think if you at least considered the possiblity that there might be some good reasons, not yet fully explained, behind the points people other people have made, you'd see that people aren't saying the things they are for personal reasons.

I understand that point of view and I am not completely ruling it out. But why dont you you tell the same thing to the people who hate the game. Why cant they just try to open there minds to the possibility that the game was reviewed highly because they actually think the game is a great game? That doesnt seem to be happening here.

Why isnt my questions being answered? Why hasnt anything other game been discussed in this manner? Why hasnt anyone ever questioned the reviews on any other game they way FF7s reviews are being questioned? Of course this would be the first time cause FF7 is hated so much.

You put words in our mouths, Iceberg.

Prak never said that none of the reviewers genuinely liked the game; he didn't even say that none of them thought it was a good game. What Prak said was that a logical explanation for FFVII's high reviews was that Square feeds a lot of advertising money into magazines. That makes a lot of logical sense. Nobody ever contradicted the idea that the reviewers might actually like the game; Prak just offered an explanation as to why the reviewers said it was such a good game.

And that brings me to the point you ignored about my Mozart and Lil' John example. What a person likes is different from what a person thinks is of high quality, and I used that example to illustrate it. And proof of it is that I like FFVII, but I acknowledge that it is a highly overrated game (though not quite as bad as Prak says it is, but there's no factual space between our opinions). I like the game Shaq Fu, but you can bet your balls I realize it's the shittiest game to be released for a console.

Basically, many reviewers could have liked FFVII and rated it highly because of that without giving it a critical analysis, and I would figure that the "backscratching" came into play in at least some circumstances. Just remember that we're really speculating, and that you can't give any documented proof to disprove anything you say there's no proof for. And you don't automatically get the benefit of the doubt.

Actually, I don't find it hard to believe that Prak is a more capable reviewer of games than magazine writers. I've read some gaming magazines, and none of their reviews were really very well written.

You put words in our mouths, Iceberg.

Prak never said that none of the reviewers genuinely liked the game; he didn't even say that none of them thought it was a good game. What Prak said was that a logical explanation for FFVII's high reviews was that Square feeds a lot of advertising money into magazines. That makes a lot of logical sense. Nobody ever contradicted the idea that the reviewers might actually like the game; Prak just offered an explanation as to why the reviewers said it was such a good game.

And that brings me to the point you ignored about my Mozart and Lil' John example. What a person likes is different from what a person thinks is of high quality, and I used that example to illustrate it. And proof of it is that I like FFVII, but I acknowledge that it is a highly overrated game (though not quite as bad as Prak says it is, but there's no factual space between our opinions). I like the game Shaq Fu, but you can bet your balls I realize it's the shittiest game to be released for a console.

Basically, many reviewers could have liked FFVII and rated it highly because of that without giving it a critical analysis, and I would figure that the "backscratching" came into play in at least some circumstances. Just remember that we're really speculating, and that you can't give any documented proof to disprove anything you say there's no proof for. And you don't automatically get the benefit of the doubt.

Actually, I don't find it hard to believe that Prak is a more capable reviewer of games than magazine writers. I've read some gaming magazines, and none of their reviews were really very well written.


How about they rated it high cause they thought it was a good game? Try that one first before you go ahead and agree with him like everyone else does.

How about they rated it high cause they thought it was a good game? Try that one first before you go ahead and agree with him like everyone else does.

Now who won't accept what other people belive? If you think we're so stupid that we don't know that that's what you think, then you must think this is the Cnidarian Forum or something.

Now who won't accept what other people belive? If you think we're so stupid that we don't know that that's what you think, then you must thing this is the Cnidarian Forum or something.


Let me check if I ever used the word stupid in my post. I dont remember that

I never said you did. Notice the word "if." My point was that you accuse us of being stubborn fools every time we dispute that the reviews of FFVII are a true indicator of its quality.

How about they rated it high cause they thought it was a good game? Try that one first before you go ahead and agree with him like everyone else does.

Because it isn't a good game, you can't just excuse plot inconsistencies, lego-block graphics and horribly broken gameplay with some ass-kisser's review. Shit is still shit, no matter how many people are paid to rate this shit so damn high.

Now who won't accept what other people belive? If you think we're so stupid that we don't know that that's what you think, then you must think this is the Cnidarian Forum or something.


lol...he probably doesn't know what a Cnidarian is...besides...i think he's more of a Platyhelminthe anyway...he needs to feed on others to justify his existence and proliferate his kind

Because it isn't a good game, you can't just excuse plot inconsistencies, lego-block graphics and horribly broken gameplay with some ass-kisser's review. Shit is still shit, no matter how many people are paid to rate this shit so damn high.


Character models were blocky yes. But in battle graphics were amazing back in 97 IMO. Especially after playing FF6. Its was a huge jump. The way the summons were presented blew almost everyone away. Gameplay wasnt as broken as you make it sound. Not too bad IMO. I do agree with some of the plot inconsistencies though. But overall I liked the story.

lol...he probably doesn't know what a Cnidarian is...besides...i think he's more of a Platyhelminthe anyway...he needs to feed on others to justify his existence and proliferate his kind

This post was not needed at all. Such a bad attempt at an insult.

This post was not needed at all. Such a bad attempt at an insult.

you only think it was a bad attempt at an insult because you don't know what i'm referring to do you?

back on topic, you and iceberg need to get a reality check here

Biased articles and high sales mean nothing as to determining the quality of a product. Only by taking an unbiased stance from a completely objective purpose can a reviewer rightfully say that he or she has written an article that is accurate and covers the entirety of the product in question.

question is, are the articles written about FF7 biased?...YES
look at how they clearly address the game's strong points but fail to even hint at any flaws in game design, plot movement, control scheme at times (i.e. push up to go right?!), or even the boorish mini-games
they hardly address them, and when they do...they cover it up with more bullshit about how great the rest of the game is...when in reality, the parts that were at least half-way decent make up no significant portion of it from any point of view

it would be interesting to know how old you are, so then we can determine if you're just innocent or just plain ignorant

I guess there's really no need for me to reply at this point, so this is just a placeholder post to let people know that I have not forgotten or retreated from this thread.

Character models were blocky yes. But in battle graphics were amazing back in 97 IMO. Especially after playing FF6. Its was a huge jump. The way the summons were presented blew almost everyone away. Gameplay wasnt as broken as you make it sound. Not too bad IMO. I do agree with some of the plot inconsistencies though. But overall I liked the story.

No it wasn't, lego-blocks polygons cannot compare to well-done sprites, had Square stuck to using watercolour 2-D graphics like they did with Saga Frontier, it would have scored higher in that area. 3-D for 3-D's sake does not make the graphics better by default. As for summons, yeah I am blown away...at how ridiculously long it took to execute, KotR anyone? If you compare it...OBJECTIVELY...to other games Squaresoft has released around that time, it's pretty obvious that FF7 is a throwaway effort game.

Bizzle : You're a moron and not worth a good reply, so fuck off.

I guess there's really no need for me to reply at this point, so this is just a placeholder post to let people know that I have not forgotten or retreated from this thread.

Seeing as where this thread's gone, replying almost seems like a total waste of time to me.

No it wasn't, lego-blocks polygons cannot compare to well-done sprites, had Square stuck to using watercolour 2-D graphics like they did with Saga Frontier, it would have scored higher in that area. 3-D for 3-D's sake does not make the graphics better by default. As for summons, yeah I am blown away...at how ridiculously long it took to execute, KotR anyone? If you compare it...OBJECTIVELY...to other games Squaresoft has released around that time, it's pretty obvious that FF7 is a throwaway effort game.

Bizzle : You're a moron and not worth a good reply, so fuck off.

Im sure you'll agree that you can do a lot more with 3D graphics than you can with 2D no matter how they look. Saying that KOTR took ages to use isnt a reply to his point about graphics either. Like someone asking "Is that a man or a woman?" and replying "yeah".

Did I hear someone mention anything about the plot? Please show me all these inconsistencies/plot holes/whatever you like to call them. I love these moments.

And heres anoher thing I love. People say that battle system in FF7 is broken. I assume that since you are all worshiping FF6 that you took note of the Vanish and Doom combo? One of the worst things added to any FF. Even Zanmato required a bit of gil to use but to say that a couple of spells can beat any monster or boss you like is ridiculous. Good thing they took that out of FF7 because that would make the game even more then flawed eh?

Granted you can do a lot more with 3-D than in 2-D, FF7 wouldn't suffer in gameplay mechanics one bit if it was done in 2-D, hence the phrase "3-D for 3-D's sake" Nobody is arguing that FF6's system isn't broken as well, but it doesn't excuse FF7's flaws in gameplay at all.

As for plot inconsistencies, I'll leave it to someone who hasn't tossed the game away in disgust.

Honestly DW, I thought you could do better that that.

No it wasn't, lego-blocks polygons cannot compare to well-done sprites, had Square stuck to using watercolour 2-D graphics like they did with Saga Frontier, it would have scored higher in that area. 3-D for 3-D's sake does not make the graphics better by default. As for summons, yeah I am blown away...at how ridiculously long it took to execute, KotR anyone? If you compare it...OBJECTIVELY...to other games Squaresoft has released around that time, it's pretty obvious that FF7 is a throwaway effort game.

I thought the lego-people in FF7 were kind of cute...>> They also emulated real motions of people pretty well. =]

I also thought that the reason they made the people look like that was for it to be more like the older FF sprites--the "super-deformed" kind of thing, except in 3-D. It was a sort of style-choice that they made...
They were capable of making realistic models, too! The battle models don't have missing elbows or lego-ness to them....
But they chose not to do that! >> Maybe some people didn't like it though, and I think it wasn't received as well as they expected.....since most people who see it don't like it at first glance.....

Granted you can do a lot more with 3-D than in 2-D, FF7 wouldn't suffer in gameplay mechanics one bit if it was done in 2-D, hence the phrase "3-D for 3-D's sake" Nobody is arguing that FF6's system isn't broken as well, but it doesn't excuse FF7's flaws in gameplay at all.

As for plot inconsistencies, I'll leave it to someone who hasn't tossed the game away in disgust.

Honestly DW, I thought you could do better that that.

Ok then show me these flaws in gameplay. You all talk about things like FF7 suffers in gameplay mechanics yet I never see anyone pointing out where and why.

Im glad you agree that FF6 has a broken battle system. Would you also agree that it also ruins the difficulty of the game? And dont give me this FF6 had great 2D graphics crap. If you fly the airship or ride a chocobo the world map becomes a big blur of colour and the controls change too and become annoying. A show of bad graphics and bad gameplay there would you agree?

You expected more out of me yet you dont reply to my point about the plot? You're either here all the way or you're not. You dont give a couple of lines and then moan about the game and leave. I really thought you could do better than that.

DW, I really hate to cut down your momentum here--heck, I'd usually take up your challenge--but this is the wrong thread to be holding this tired old discussion in. The dominant discussion this time is about the credibility of certain reviews.

DW, I really hate to cut down your momentum here--heck, I'd usually take up your challenge--but this is the wrong thread to be holding this tired old discussion in. The dominant discussion this time is about the credibility of certain reviews.

I havent been on FF Shrine for a while so i missed the start of this review debate. I came on to see the last few pages so I replyed. Ive no problem about arguing about reviewers though dont worry.

Mm...
The debate about the quality and flaws and whether FF7 is 'broken' has been discussed many times....
By comparison to other games, most people here say FF7 isn't quite up to par....

However, there isn't anything in FF7 that I want to change--I loved it when I played it....=]
If I wanted something else, I'd just play another game...>>

I havent been on FF Shrine for a while so i missed the start of this review debate. I came on to see the last few pages so I replyed. Ive no problem about arguing about reviewers though dont worry.

Honestly, there isn't much of a point. I've already more or less crushed the credibility of the opposition, so we're mostly just pissing on people who dare to defy my flawless logic.

Honestly, there isn't much of a point. I've already more or less crushed the credibility of the opposition, so we're mostly just pissing on people who dare to defy my flawless logic.

lollin

So you stop me in my glorious rant to talk about reviews and when I say lets go you back off? Who are you and what have you done with the real Prak you bastard!?!

The line about "pissing on people who dare to defy my flawless logic" should have been enough to prove my identity.

The line about "pissing on people who dare to defy my flawless logic" should have been enough to prove my identity.

I guess thats true. I wonder what iceberg will have to say about this.

I guess thats true. I wonder what iceberg will have to say about this.

nothing...he's crying to his mommy

I seriously doubt any of your insults could cause him to do that.

Seriously. He's far too pig-headed for that, and you're basically calling him out and challenging him to continue his pointless defiance of sense.

So this topic is just over then? You all give out about stupid fanboys but I was actually going to bother debating and you all run off. Bring back Giga Flare!

If you really want to debate, then go right ahead. You know I won't pass on a challenge. However, I'd kind of like to leave this thread open for more discussion on the current issue, so it'd be best to make a new thread for general FFVII bashing/defending.

Why just us having all the fun? There seems to be a few people for and against so why not team them up?

So this topic is just over then? You all give out about stupid fanboys but I was actually going to bother debating and you all run off. Bring back Giga Flare!

You called :p

If you want to debate the issue of FF7 being given high ratings, due to Square Enix bribing magazine companies, by making some points i'll read over them and do my best to reply to them. ;)

However I'm going to be the first to admit that I haven't got as much background knowledge on this as some of the others in here, so am probably not the best choice of person to argue the subject with.

Actually, right now, I'd say I am never likely to go see a movie that's critically acclaimed, either. I'll only go to a movie if I hear about it from my friends, and even then only at the dollar theatre (i.e. Snakes on a Plane).

nothing...he's crying to his mommy


Z obviously loves the attention I dont give, its pretty funny. Yeah I called my mom she didnt answer the phone so I figured ah fuck it, let me post.


Prak pigheaded is a word that bests describes you and you should know that.

Giga no one here has backround knowledge of the square bribing, its all speculation.


Desert whats your take on the whole FF7 briding scandal lol? Do you think it happened? Do you find it funny that it was only ever brought up on FF7s behalf?

Honestly, there isn't much of a point. I've already more or less crushed the credibility of the opposition, so we're mostly just pissing on people who dare to defy my flawless logic.


Its funny how you say that. " I've already more or less crushed the credibility of the opposition" ok, and then "so we're mostly just pissing on people who dare to defy my flawless logic" Whos we? Oh thats right you talk and you have your little prak fanboys whos literally suck your dick online its actually pretty funny. Its actually really sad. Should I name names?

Chunky is the first on the list. He basically says the same shit you do like right after you say it. He's like your little retarded sidekick. Come on Prak you know thats the truth.

Oh and just for the record look how prak defends FFX2

"Guys, your personal dislike of a game does not represent the concensus of the masses. The irrefutable fact of the matter is that FFX-2 received overwhelmingly positive reviews and sold well over 5 million copies. That should be ample proof that it is regarded as an excellent game".

Heres the link read it for yourselves.

Thread 21445

wouldnt the same apply for FF7? Hmmmmmmm I smell contradiction. I see that you are a FFX2 fanboy.

Its funny how you say that. " I've already more or less crushed the credibility of the opposition" ok, and then "so we're mostly just pissing on people who dare to defy my flawless logic" Whos we? Oh thats right you talk and you have your little prak fanboys whos literally suck your dick online its actually pretty funny. Its actually really sad. Should I name names?

Chunky is the first on the list. He basically says the same shit you do like right after you say it. He's like your little retarded sidekick. Come on Prak you thats the truth.

Oh and just for the record look how prak defends FFX2

"Guys, your personal dislike of a game does not represent the concensus of the masses. The irrefutable fact of the matter is that FFX-2 received overwhelmingly positive reviews and sold well over 5 million copies. That should be ample proof that it is regarded as an excellent game".

Heres the link read it for yourselves.

Thread 21445

wouldnt the same apply for FF7? Hmmmmmmm I smell contradiction. I see that you are a FFX2 fanboy.


WOW! lol@ Prak.

Its funny how you say that. " I've already more or less crushed the credibility of the opposition" ok, and then "so we're mostly just pissing on people who dare to defy my flawless logic" Whos we? Oh thats right you talk and you have your little prak fanboys whos literally suck your dick online its actually pretty funny. Its actually really sad. Should I name names?

Chunky is the first on the list. He basically says the same shit you do like right after you say it. He's like your little retarded sidekick. Come on Prak you thats the truth.

Ad hominem, fail.

Ad hominem, fail.

Look here goes one of the fanboys I was referring to. You're trying to sound just like him. Come on have some dignity.

I want to see how his little fanboys, and prak himself, try to defend that last post.

It's nothing about fanboyism, you lump of sun-baked whale cum. You just can't discuss things objectively, you've contributed nothing but pathetic potshots at legitimate arguments contrary to your opinion.

Did your mother accidentally play fetus rocket when giving birth to you and shot you into an abortion bin, or are you just that attention starved?

Did your mother accidentally play fetus rocket when giving birth to you and shot you into an abortion bin, or are you just that attention starved?

Can I use this as part of my sig?

Go ahead. :D

its all speculation.



Desert whats your take on the whole FF7 briding scandal lol? Do you think it happened? Do you find it funny that it was only ever brought up on FF7s behalf?

Enough is enough. I have had it with this motherfuckin' bullshit on this motherfickin' forum.

Again you COMPLETELY ignored what I said with the exception of your use of my word, "speculation." I'm sure Prak has a good answer for what Bizzle brought up about the FFX-II thread, but I've got something for you in the meantime.

Firstly, I never heard about the FFVII briding scandal. Did the game have sex out of wedlock or something?

And it's ridiculous to refer to something Prak stated was a common business practice as a bribing scandal, because the fine line between bribing and contributing, however nitpicky and stupid it is, makes a huge difference in the real world. Look at Political Action Committees in the U.S. government. Effectively, they're buying legislation by contributing to Congressmen's reelection campaigns, but there is nothing illegal about what they do, something to me that is a serious flaw in our government.

And you just used the "it was only brought up on FFVII" argument for about the sixth time, so I'll address it for you. It's because in every other FF game, the people defending the game, particularly in the case of FFIX, weren't reduced to using such shitty tactics as saying "well, it got good reviews, so you must just be wrong and you just can't accept that it's good." Prak's example was just to counter the very weak point that the thread's dumbass starter used:


And Prak, Final Fantasy X2 is not widely regarded as quite a good game, everyone who bought a copy I know of expressed how much they hated it by returning it to stores, I had never met a single person who said they liked this game until I came here. I even talked with 3 peopel who work are EB games about what they thought of it. They all said it was a terrible game.

It's very easy to counter that point, which has little bearing on the game's quality anyway, with a statment about the reviews. And you don't see anybody saying that FFVII was bad because it was so disliked; I doubt you'll argue there.

Also, Bizzle, you are very silly for taking this seriously:


Honestly, there isn't much of a point. I've already more or less crushed the credibility of the opposition, so we're mostly just pissing on people who dare to defy my flawless logic.

That post is quite clearly meant to goad anybody arguing against him. Prak isn't foolish enough to belive he's absolutely right about everything, even if he says he is.

Enough is enough. I have had it with this motherfuckin' bullshit on this motherfickin' forum.

Again you COMPLETELY ignored what I said with the exception of your use of my word, "speculation." I'm sure Prak has a good answer for what Bizzle brought up about the FFX-II thread, but I've got something for you in the meantime.

Firstly, I never heard about the FFVII briding scandal. Did the game have sex out of wedlock or something?

And it's ridiculous to refer to something Prak stated was a common business practice as a bribing scandal, because the fine line between bribing and contributing, however nitpicky and stupid it is, makes a huge difference in the real world. Look at Political Action Committees in the U.S. government. Effectively, they're buying legislation by contributing to Congressmen's reelection campaigns, but there is nothing illegal about what they do, something to me that is a serious flaw in our government.

And you just used the "it was only brought up on FFVII" argument for about the sixth time, so I'll address it for you. It's because in every other FF game, the people defending the game, particularly in the case of FFIX, weren't reduced to using such shitty tactics as saying "well, it got good reviews, so you must just be wrong and you just can't accept that it's good." Prak's example was just to counter the very weak point that the thread's dumbass starter used:



It's very easy to counter that point, which has little bearing on the game's quality anyway, with a statment about the reviews. And you don't see anybody saying that FFVII was bad because it was so disliked; I doubt you'll argue there.

Also, Bizzle, you are very silly for taking this seriously:



That post is quite clearly meant to goad anybody arguing against him. Prak isn't foolish enough to belive he's absolutely right about everything, even if he says he is.


"shitty tactics as saying "well, it got good reviews"

So you are saying that Prak is using shitty tactics in defense for FFX2. Hes basically saying the same thing iceberg said in his posts. Am I right or wrong? He was basically caught in a huge contradiction but yet still defended. Pfft its hilarious.

Prak I have to give it up to you man. Im not sure what you did to these guys but they worship you lol. Its sad.

Its nothing about fanboyism? Is that right Joan? Whoever defends FF7 is a fanboy but you can hang off of praks nuts and just nod yes to everything he says and your not a fanboy?

Z obviously loves the attention I dont give, its pretty funny. Yeah I called my mom she didnt answer the phone so I figured ah fuck it, let me post.


Prak pigheaded is a word that bests describes you and you should know that.

Giga no one here has backround knowledge of the square bribing, its all speculation.


Desert whats your take on the whole FF7 briding scandal lol? Do you think it happened? Do you find it funny that it was only ever brought up on FF7s behalf?

why give me more attention by quoting my posts?
you really should be careful, as you'll probably end up looking like ur ava...but that WAS a good movie so i'll give you that much

Prak is NOT pigheaded...BIGheaded is probably what you were looking for

and as for your assumption about Giga not knowing about square bribing others...there's as much speculation as to the validity of that as there is to the quality of FFVII in general


and the reason why the "bribing scandal" was brought up on 7's behalf is because of where this thread is located, dumbass

Giga no one here has backround knowledge of the square bribing, its all speculation.

I realise looking back at that last post of mine, I didn't make it very clear, my apologies for that ;)

When I was talking about background knowledge, I meant knowledge which led up to the speculation of magazine companies being paid extra to give good game reviews, not just on FF7 but on games in general.

While I know a certain amount of information, going by things i've read both on here and on other sites, in order to make up my own mind about the liklihood of that situation happening with Square, I admittedly don't know enough to hold a decent debate on how likely it happens within the gaming industry in general.

Other people in here have given specific examples to explain just why it is they are making the speculations they are, which shows that they have a greater background knowledge on that subject than me.




"Guys, your personal dislike of a game does not represent the concensus of the masses. The irrefutable fact of the matter is that FFX-2 received overwhelmingly positive reviews and sold well over 5 million copies. That should be ample proof that it is regarded as an excellent game".

Heres the link read it for yourselves.

Thread 21445

wouldnt the same apply for FF7? Hmmmmmmm I smell contradiction. I see that you are a FFX2 fanboy.

I'm going to be the first to admit, hoping not to give anyone else in here the wrong idea on what I mean, that in this case I think Bizzle makes a fair point. Not so much on the fan boy comment, but in thinking that some of what was said in that thread appears to be contradictive, in relation to what we're all discussing at the moment.

That doesn't change the fact that I agree FF7 is an over rated game and doesn't change the fact that certainly I think it's reasonable to assume it got high reviews because of the reasons people have previously given. However I do agree that what applies to FF7 isn't something that doesn't also apply to other games, including FFX-2. A high number of positive reviews and sales isn't enough to determine the quality of any game, on their own.

On the other hand though I have read other threads in which other reasons were given by Prak, and others, as to why it was FFX-2 was a decent game, so i'm sure he can give an explanation on that.

I have to agree with Giga Flare. I definitely wouldn't describe Prak as a fanboy of FFX-2 as he nearly always backs up his claims with decent arguments, to the point that I've actually reconsidered my own opinion on FFX-2. But on the other hand if he's going to use reviews and sales figures to prove that FFX-2 was an excellent game then to be totally honest I don't see why the same logic can't be applied to VII.

Okay guys, time to set the record straight. You're all basically working on an incorrect assumption, so your jabs at me are worthless. Explanation below.



Its funny how you say that. " I've already more or less crushed the credibility of the opposition" ok, and then "so we're mostly just pissing on people who dare to defy my flawless logic" Whos we? Oh thats right you talk and you have your little prak fanboys whos literally suck your dick online its actually pretty funny. Its actually really sad. Should I name names?

Chunky is the first on the list. He basically says the same shit you do like right after you say it. He's like your little retarded sidekick. Come on Prak you know thats the truth.

And what is your point? If people agree with me, that's their own business and does not affect my perspectives in any way.


Oh and just for the record look how prak defends FFX2

"Guys, your personal dislike of a game does not represent the concensus of the masses. The irrefutable fact of the matter is that FFX-2 received overwhelmingly positive reviews and sold well over 5 million copies. That should be ample proof that it is regarded as an excellent game".

Heres the link read it for yourselves.

Thread 21445

wouldnt the same apply for FF7? Hmmmmmmm I smell contradiction. I see that you are a FFX2 fanboy.

Excellent bit of detective work there, except for the fact that you're a moron and came to the wrong conclusion because you took the post out of context. I was not using reviews to show that it's a good game. I was using reviews to prove that someone was wrong when they claimed it was received badly and regarded by most as a bad game. I was speaking of perception, not the actual game's quality. Therefore, your entire tirade is worthless.

As for being a fanboy of the game, you couldn't be farther off base. There is absolutely nothing that I don't look at critically. I merely defend the game from the absurd amount of unjust hatred it attracts.


That post is quite clearly meant to goad anybody arguing against him. Prak isn't foolish enough to belive he's absolutely right about everything, even if he says he is.

You want to hear a little secret? I don't believe I'm right about everything, but I know that I'm right about almost everything.


Prak I have to give it up to you man. Im not sure what you did to these guys but they worship you lol. Its sad.

It's something that comes from being right pretty much all the time, as well as being able to prove it effectively even when the view isn't popular.

I was not using reviews to show that it's a good game. I was using reviews to prove that someone was wrong when they claimed it was received badly and regarded by most as a bad game.

Ah, get you. I re-read that thread from the beginning and now see why it was you made that response. My apologies.

ROFL @ Bizzle the moron

Okay guys, time to set the record straight. You're all basically working on an incorrect assumption, so your jabs at me are worthless. Explanation below.




And what is your point? If people agree with me, that's their own business and does not affect my perspectives in any way.



Excellent bit of detective work there, except for the fact that you're a moron and came to the wrong conclusion because you took the post out of context. I was not using reviews to show that it's a good game. I was using reviews to prove that someone was wrong when they claimed it was received badly and regarded by most as a bad game. I was speaking of perception, not the actual game's quality. Therefore, your entire tirade is worthless.

As for being a fanboy of the game, you couldn't be farther off base. There is absolutely nothing that I don't look at critically. I merely defend the game from the absurd amount of unjust hatred it attracts.



You want to hear a little secret? I don't believe I'm right about everything, but I know that I'm right about almost everything.



It's something that comes from being right pretty much all the time, as well as being able to prove it effectively even when the view isn't popular.


The same goes for FF7 though anyway you look at it. In FFX2's case, I liked the game but it had its flaws. For me the story didnt catch my attention too much. IMO nothing new was really added to the game, I might be wrong though. I havent played it in a while. Anyhow strong reviews and sales do prove it to be regarded as a good game. As for FF7, same goes with the reviews and sales but the credibility of the reviews are being put on trial by previously mentioned aligations. Doesnt seem to be fair.

I hope you realize that I can completely bury your argument by simply putting X-2's reviews under the same scrutiny as VII's. It won't affect that old discussion in the slightest since it was about nothing more than perception and won't be harmed by having the same allegations levied against those reviews, but it will provide me with more ammunition to back up my case against FFVII's reviews. At this point, the advantage is with me. I would recommend switching tactics and attacking from a new direction.

you've left him with hardly anything Prak...no angle...no argument...no chance

i'm not brown-nosing...just stating the facts and giving respect where respect is due

you've left him with hardly anything Prak...no angle...no argument...no chance

i'm not brown-nosing...just stating the facts and giving respect where respect is due

Here goes one of praks little ass kissers. Come on look at yourself. Are you actually wearing a cheerleaders outfit on and Prak pom poms?

What attack are you talking about Prak? Im only stating what I feel about the whole bribing situation. No more, no less. Maybe bizzle is trying to attack. Read the last post, did it have any insults or your name or anything in it? No just my opinion.

Ok so answer this, what benefit would gamespot.com get out of adding FF7 to its best games of all time list? Did square call them up and say hey, we have a favor to ask, remember we scratched your back last? Put FF7 on your little list over there and we'll throw some money your way. But of course it cant be legite because the woman who wrote the article is a fanboy and is totally bias, right?

And Z please give it a rest, you are looking ridiculous worshipping this guy, its just a forum.

Better to worship someone who knows what he's talking about than a shitty game.

Here goes one of praks little ass kissers. Come on look at yourself. Are you actually wearing a cheerleaders outfit on and Prak pom poms?

What attack are you talking about Prak? Im only stating what I feel about the whole bribing situation. No more, no less. Maybe bizzle is trying to attack. Read the last post, did it have any insults or your name or anything in it? No just my opinion.

Ok so answer this, what benefit would gamespot.com get out of adding FF7 to its best games of all time list? Did square call them up and say hey, we have a favor to ask, remember we scratched your back last? Put FF7 on your little list over there and we'll throw some money your way. But of course it cant be legite because the woman who wrote the article is a fanboy and is totally bias, right?

And Z please give it a rest, you are looking ridiculous worshipping this guy, its just a forum.

the benefit would be to please people like you who are assumptuous idiots that eat up anything that is given to them

once again, read the post...i do NOT kiss-up to Prak
if i ever met you in real life i'd make sure you know that by grinding your pathetic fanboy skull into the pavement you wuss

Zetsumei, just a friendly reminder that it's not a good form to put up an internet tough guy act as it's most likely shenanigans.

Zetsumei, just a friendly reminder that it's not a good form to put up an internet tough guy act as it's most likely shenanigans.

it's not shenanigans, i'm really a violent person when confronted by a person such as Iceberg

Either way, don't flaunt it in the forums. ;)

Either way, don't flaunt it in the forums. ;)

fair enough...so i'll address Iceberg once again
why do you think i worship Prak?
what viable evidence do you have that could be proven as worship of the party in question?
and...why do you insist on defending this game so much?

fair enough...so i'll address Iceberg once again
why do you think i worship Prak?
what viable evidence do you have that could be proven as worship of the party in question?
and...why do you insist on defending this game so much?

First off if you met me in person and confronted me, you'd have no idea what you were getting yourself into but that is besides the point.

What proof? Hmmm just look at the other post. You root him on constantly which is really not needed. He knows what type of person he is, he really doesnt need his little fanboys always reminding him.

There has been plenty of FF7 arguments at this forum, have I participated in all of them, NO. Its not so much that I defend the game itself. I just didnt like the fact of people not accepting the high reviews from almost every magazine and website. An excuse has to be brought up to counter said reviews. Thats my point, talk about how how much you hate the game all day, I really dont care. I just dont think its fair to discredit every review by bringing up those aligations and calling anyone who says the game is good bias or a fanboy.

Anyway I have no idea why you are so upset at me when the insults came from your end first. So I am upsetting you how? I have no idea.

Chunky is the first on the list. He basically says the same shit you do like right after you say it. He's like your little retarded sidekick. Come on Prak you know thats the truth.

Of course, those of us with brains realize that in the instance you must be referring to, I couldn't have seen his post, as his was literally one minute before mine. I'm so sorry, oh master of all things retarded, for checking for spelling and typos. As for retarded sidekicks, your oh-so-asinine "sucking dick" line had been used by Iceberg a few months ago. Following your brand of idiocy, you'd be his little retarded sidekick. Also, nice job in taking a shot at me only AFTER I stopped just short of posting "I'M NOT POSTING IN THIS THREAD" in an obnoxious, 72-point font. Did you think you were scoring points somehow? Go waste another forum's bandwidth; it's better used by folks like Iceberg. I may not much like him, but at least he doesn't try some cheap potshot after I've announced my lack of interest in this thread.

edit since I'm here now...


I really dont care. I just dont think its fair to discredit every review by bringing up those aligations and calling anyone who says the game is good bias or a fanboy.

Having reached my spite quota for the day, I'm going to be fairly respectful now, LoL. The thing about the reviews is that "we" (the "haters") weren't the ones who brought them into the discussion to begin with. You of all people should know that if you're going to bring something up in a debate (especially at FFS), it's going to be scrutinized. When reviews (like the one I linked in this thread) is even more of a rant than, say, the link you posted to start this thread, it would be kind of irresponsible to not bring up issues with reviews/reviewers.

edit again since I forgot something:

For the record, contrary to what I might have said previously, I don't think FFVII is awful. Or THAT bad. The first disc is actally pretty decent. It just chaps my posterior when folks scream about how great FFVII supposedly is when there are games that are easily better, like SO2, FFIX, Lunar, etc, etc, etc...

Of course, those of us with brains realize that in the instance you must be referring to, I couldn't have seen his post, as his was literally one minute before mine. I'm so sorry, oh master of all things retarded, for checking for spelling and typos. As for retarded sidekicks, your oh-so-asinine "sucking dick" line had been used by Iceberg a few months ago. Following your brand of idiocy, you'd be his little retarded sidekick. Also, nice job in taking a shot at me only AFTER I stopped just short of posting "I'M NOT POSTING IN THIS THREAD" in an obnoxious, 72-point font. Did you think you were scoring points somehow? Go waste another forum's bandwidth; it's better used by folks like Iceberg. I may not much like him, but at least he doesn't try some cheap potshot after I've announced my lack of interest in this thread.

edit since I'm here now...



Having reached my spite quota for the day, I'm going to be fairly respectful now, LoL. The thing about the reviews is that "we" (the "haters") weren't the ones who brought them into the discussion to begin with. You of all people should know that if you're going to bring something up in a debate (especially at FFS), it's going to be scrutinized. When reviews (like the one I linked in this thread) is even more of a rant than, say, the link you posted to start this thread, it would be kind of irresponsible to not bring up issues with reviews/reviewers.

edit again since I forgot something:

For the record, contrary to what I might have said previously, I don't think FFVII is awful. Or THAT bad. The first disc is actally pretty decent. It just chaps my posterior when folks scream about how great FFVII supposedly is when there are games that are easily better, like SO2, FFIX, Lunar, etc, etc, etc...

I dont mind if the reviews are scrutinized. Talk about them all day if you want. I just think the whole point towards the FF7s reviews was a little cheap and lame.

Just for the record, Im not usually the potshotter per se lol. Only when potshots are directed at me first.

The review you brought up was cheap and lame, so it's only fitting. ;)

*zing*

The review you brought up was cheap and lame, so it's only fitting. ;)

*zing*


I must have missed something because I dont remember bringing up a review. Read the link again. ;)

What, this (http://forums.ffshrine.org/showpost.php?p=623823&postcount=1)? ;)

What, this (http://forums.ffshrine.org/showpost.php?p=623823&postcount=1)? ;)

Do you see a score there? Its an article gamespot writes on each game as it is inducted into there list of great games of all time. Ill link you their FF7 review if you want.

A review doesn't necessarily need to end with an arbitrary score.

A review doesn't necessarily need to end with an arbitrary score.

Its not a review its simply an article inducting FF7 in there greatest games of all time.

Heres the review, enjoy the bias

http://www.gamespot.com/ps/rpg/finalfantasy7/review.html

Yeah, that's the review I was talking about in my last post. Like I said before, I think it'd be irresponsible to not point out bias, especially when it's as bad as it is in that review. Anyway, what's so cheap and lame about scrutinizing the reviews? If it were really so lame, then you shouldn't have any problems putting down any arguments against them.

Yeah, that's the review I was talking about in my last post. Like I said before, I think it'd be irresponsible to not point out bias, especially when it's as bad as it is in that review. Anyway, what's so cheap and lame about scrutinizing the reviews? If it were really so lame, then you shouldn't have any problems putting down any arguments against them.


Either I posted wrong, or you misunderstood me. Im not saying that its lame to scrutinize the reviews, Im saying its lame to say that square paid off magazines and site to give FF7 good reviews or whatever you said. Well actually, I remember Prak bringing that point up a while back.

Iceberg, do you believe in a deity?

Iceberg, do you believe in a deity?

A god, maybe. If thats what you are referring to.


What does that have to do with anything.

Then you're an intellectually-dishonest hypocrite. There's no proof, nor evidence to support the existence of a deity, yet you still believe in it, yet when circumstantial evidence is presented to support the argument of reviewers being bribed to rate games higher, you go all "NO PROOF LOL!111" And why? Because you disagree with the notion, so basically your only argument here is simple disagreement, which holds no water, and you try to make it look as if you have an actual argument? Fuck off.

Can I see the proof of these bribes? If its already in the thread then sorry but ive been away for most of this.

DW, careful not to call them bribes. A bribe implies it was illegal, in which case there would be either no evidence or a legal case, most likely. This is advertising money we're talking about, something that is completely legal.

Iceberg, when you made the point about the reviews, you expected everyone to jump in and say "OK, the reviewers most definitely all thought the game was good and your point is strengthened."

For the last time, and please at least say something about this, the idea of the advertising money is a possible explanation for FFVII's reviews. But as soon as it was mentioned, you started screaming bloody murder and saying there was no proof, and that you had to be absolutely right that the reviewers were being completely unbiased and logical. You are starting to irritate me with your silly stubbornness.

The link posted to the review, not the game description posted at the beginning, should be evidence enough that reviews have little bearing on a game's actual quality. All the reviewer does is tell you that the graphics and music are good, and tell you that the plot is good. There's no real description as to why all of these aspects are good. Why the reviewer think's the plot is good is really a mystery, although it's understandable to leave out details to avoid giving spoilers to readers. But Iceberg, think about this logically. Is a game company going to advertise in a magazine that gave their game a bad review? It makes no sense to put an advertisement in the very same magazine as an article telling how bad it is. And with the amount of money Square put into advertising, it's really no stretch to say that magazines jumped in ready to write ass-kissing reviews to get some cash. I know there's no proof, but there doesn't have to be.

So Iceberg, nobody needs you to say that there's no proof. Explain why there is a need for proof, or your argument goes out the window.

If what your saying is true then no game would get a bad review for fear of upsesting the creators and their advertising money, yet there are games who get bad reviews.

Well, subtlety is required to put up an illusion of credibility. I mean, who the hell would rate Beyond the Beyond above 6/10?

Because some games are new games that just flop. Final Fantasy VII was a sequal in a well-done series; it was expected to be great, and Square marketed the hell out of it. Shaq Fu, on the other hand, is a piece of crap game that nobody would play for more than five minutes (I've tried) and that wasn't heavily marketed; thus, it received no positive reviews. Granted, FFVII is easily a better game than Shaq Fu, but my point is that there is not as much money involved in new titles that aren't hyped up before their release.

Then you're an intellectually-dishonest hypocrite. There's no proof, nor evidence to support the existence of a deity, yet you still believe in it, yet when circumstantial evidence is presented to support the argument of reviewers being bribed to rate games higher, you go all "NO PROOF LOL!111" And why? Because you disagree with the notion, so basically your only argument here is simple disagreement, which holds no water, and you try to make it look as if you have an actual argument? Fuck off.

It almost seems like you had that all typed up before he even responded because he said "maybe", not yes. Meaning he is saying their is a possiblility there could be one but he's not saying their is one for a fact. About that whole bribe shit your talking about. Their is a possibility they did and theirs a possiblity they didn't. Until you can prove it, it's not fact. I personally doubt their was any bribes. I could list off many many games that had similiar publicity and even more than FF VII and then got shut down by reviewers because the game wasn't good enough. I do disagree that reviews and sales make a game good though. They do influence it but the main factor that defines if a game is good or not is the players.

I personally think you're seriously under-stating the power of exposure.

As for the bribes, who knows? Not going down that road.

eh yeah i guess you could say that.

lovely ava by the way

A salient (yet forgotten) point that should be brought up again is that partly with Iceberg's help, a pattern's been established of highly advertised games being quite overrated. We started with FFVII, and also discussed one of the GTAs, as well as Halo 2. Another game that received such treatment was Advent Rising--while I quite liked it, it was indeed flawed. That didn't stop GamePro from giving it an "Editor's Choice" award. Its 4.5 out of 5 rating was the same as games like Oblivion, Valkryie Profile 2, and RE4. Advent Rising had all sorts of advertising, from two-page ads in gaming mags, to a commercial to be played before Star Wars Episode III.

No, it's not proof of "bribery," but then again, who accused Squeenix of bribery? The fact is, there is a pattern that only a dullard would fail to recognize.

First off if you met me in person and confronted me, you'd have no idea what you were getting yourself into but that is besides the point.

What proof? Hmmm just look at the other post. You root him on constantly which is really not needed. He knows what type of person he is, he really doesnt need his little fanboys always reminding him.

There has been plenty of FF7 arguments at this forum, have I participated in all of them, NO. Its not so much that I defend the game itself. I just didnt like the fact of people not accepting the high reviews from almost every magazine and website. An excuse has to be brought up to counter said reviews. Thats my point, talk about how how much you hate the game all day, I really dont care. I just dont think its fair to discredit every review by bringing up those aligations and calling anyone who says the game is good bias or a fanboy.

Anyway I have no idea why you are so upset at me when the insults came from your end first. So I am upsetting you how? I have no idea.


ooh i'm sooo scared...what do you say to a bullet entering your skull nerd?
and of course i would root for Prak, if he's on a roll why not let him continue to discredit everything you say?
and as for you calling me Prak's fanboy...even IF that were true...i'd rather be a fanboy of Prak than a fanboy of FFVII any day

go fuck yourself Iceberg, that's all you're good for anyway

A salient (yet forgotten) point that should be brought up again is that partly with Iceberg's help, a pattern's been established of highly advertised games being quite overrated. We started with FFVII, and also discussed one of the GTAs, as well as Halo 2. Another game that received such treatment was Advent Rising--while I quite liked it, it was indeed flawed. That didn't stop GamePro from giving it an "Editor's Choice" award. Its 4.5 out of 5 rating was the same as games like Oblivion, Valkryie Profile 2, and RE4. Advent Rising had all sorts of advertising, from two-page ads in gaming mags, to a commercial to be played before Star Wars Episode III.

No, it's not proof of "bribery," but then again, who accused Squeenix of bribery? The fact is, there is a pattern that only a dullard would fail to recognize.

I do strongly agree that Halo 2 is overrated (especially single player) and why it got such a high score. I wouldnt use Advent Children as an example though. Game Pro may have given it a 90% and the editors choice, but the rest of the reviews gave it mediocre scores. (http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages2/914754.asp?q=advent%20rising)

Final Fantasy VII scores however were quite different (http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages2/197341.asp?q=Final%20fantasy%20VII) Advertisement's influence can only go so far

Just wondering which GTA you were refering to?

I do strongly agree that Halo 2 is overrated (especially single player) and why it got such a high score. I wouldnt use Advent Children as an example though. Game Pro may have given it a 90% and the editors choice, but the rest of the reviews gave it mediocre scores. (http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpage...dvent%20rising)

Look at the reviews from Game Informer, GamePro, and IGN compared to the rest--I'm not sure about GamePro, but I know firsthand that Advent Rising had lots of advertising in IGN and Game Informer.

ooh i'm sooo scared...what do you say to a bullet entering your skull nerd?
and of course i would root for Prak, if he's on a roll why not let him continue to discredit everything you say?
and as for you calling me Prak's fanboy...even IF that were true...i'd rather be a fanboy of Prak than a fanboy of FFVII any day

go fuck yourself Iceberg, that's all you're good for anyway


Oh god please shut the fuck up. Bullet in my skull pfft come on please. You really look like an idiot right now, please shhhh.

Joan as far as the whole god thing, I put maybe as an honest answer. Would you believe me, no of course not cause you were trying to make a point. Im not the most religious person you'll find around but I know plenty of people who have alot of input as to why the feel there is such a high being. But that is a whole other thread in itself. It was a really bad comparison by the way.

FF1WithAllThieves, Im not asking everyone to jump on and believe what Im saying or follow my opinion, but I am entitled to beleive what I want. Am I right or wrong. So you are trying to say because this whole bribe bullshit was brought up, Im suppose to just say yeah that happened and thats the end of the story? I havent completely ruled that out, but with this forum the big thing is proof. I hear that all the time, wheres the proof, back up your argument etc. This is a really bold statement to say such things are going on. Why shouldnt there be some proof. So I can easily say FF1WithAllThieves, likes men. Someone asks me to show proof I can say, I dont need proof, men on ocassion like other men and I think FF1WithAllThieves likes men and thats the end of it. No, those aligations can not be brought up without some sort of evidence. If not then its just speculation. Oh by the way I could care less if you are getting irritated.

Its funny because when the whole issue of bribing was brought up advent rising was one of the games that popped into my head. That game was marketed heavily and from what I remember got pretty mediocre reviews. If I remember correctly this game even had a money give away sweepstakes. In other forms of media, movies like waterworld who were heavily marketed and the budgets were big, tanked and were reviewed harshly. Its not always the case where big games, movies etc get the best ratings.

Take another game like NBA 07 the show, it has Kobe on the cover and has mutliple ads on tv, web sites and magazines and it was given bad reviews. Obviously there was alot of money involved. Alot of games with alot of money involved in its production and promotion dont always get high ratings. Games with the big budgets usually come out better than low budget games because better teams are assembled to make them. Is this not true? Sometimes you have games that have tiny budgets and no promotion and come out to be sleeper hits. For example, katamari damacy and the original wario ware. In halos case, I know a shitload of people who would argue to the death on how good that game is. It recieved high ratings but a shit load of people actually love that game and they have strong opinions and facts to back them up. To say its over rated IMO is actually a matter of opinion. Compare it to alot of FPS games and it stands out pretty well.

Now in defense of FF7, the game was a big step in the FF series as far as presentation, and story telling. The game made a huge leap from the snes and that can not be denied. As far as storyline I think its a matter of opinion. I actually liked the storyline. It wasnt the same old lets return the crystals to save the world/hey Im the main character and Im the chose one, let me get a group of friends and save the world. It was a complicated storyline and was a breath of fresh air imo. As far as the battle system goes, I actually like the materia system. I really didnt have a problem with making an uber team. Whats so bad about that? The characters were great. As far as cloud he was a departure from the normal rpg main characters who is the chose one and is destined to save the world. Was it my favorite rpg, no but it was a damn good game IMO. So do I agree with the article saying greatest games of all time, for the game it is and what it did for rpg gaming, yes it belongs amongst the best. Go ahead start the scrutiny/ insults.

Look at the reviews from Game Informer, GamePro, and IGN compared to the rest--I'm not sure about GamePro, but I know firsthand that Advent Rising had lots of advertising in IGN and Game Informer.

Yeah, but still, 77% and 78% really aren't that good of scores. I personally have never played Advent Rising since i own the ps2 and regretably, the gamecube. I only saw on television and read in magazines this game being shredded by reviewers. Each and every reviewer that rated this game low mentioned something about how much advertising this game had. As I said before advertising influence can only go so far.



Its funny because when the whole issue of bribing was brought up advent rising was one of the games that popped into my head. That game was marketed heavily and from what I remember got pretty mediocre reviews. If I remember correctly this game even had a money give away sweepstakes. In other forms of media, movies like waterworld who were heavily marketed and the budgets were big, tanked and were reviewed harshly. Its not always the case where big games, movies etc get the best ratings.

Take another game like NBA 07 the show, it has Kobe on the cover and has mutliple ads on tv, web sites and magazines and it was given bad reviews. Obviously there was alot of money involved. Alot of games with alot of money involved in its production and promotion dont always get high ratings. Games with the big budgets usually come out better than low budget games because better teams are assembled to make them. Is this not true? Sometimes you have games that have tiny budgets and no promotion and come out to be sleeper hits. For example, katamari damacy and the original wario ware. In halos case, I know a shitload of people who would argue to the death on how good that game is. It recieved high ratings but a shit load of people actually love that game and they have strong opinions and facts to back them up. To say its over rated IMO is actually a matter of opinion. Compare it to alot of FPS games and it stands out pretty well.

Now in defense of FF7, the game was a big step in the FF series as far as presentation, and story telling. The game made a huge leap from the snes and that can not be denied. As far as storyline I think its a matter of opinion. I actually liked the storyline. It wasnt the same old lets return the crystals to save the world/hey Im the main character and Im the chose one, let me get a group of friends and save the world. It was a complicated storyline and was a breath of fresh air imo. As far as the battle system goes, I actually like the materia system. I really didnt have a problem with making an uber team. Whats so bad about that? The characters were great. As far as cloud he was a departure from the normal rpg main characters who is the chose one and is destined to save the world. Was it my favorite rpg, no but it was a damn good game IMO. So do I agree with the article saying greatest games of all time, for the game it is and what it did for rpg gaming, yes it belongs amongst the best. Go ahead start the scrutiny/ insults.


Take out the first three paragraphs in the comment and you have a decent arguement with some good points. I had forgotten about that whole million dollar sweepstakes Advent had going.

Oh god please shut the fuck up. Bullet in my skull pfft come on please. You really look like an idiot right now, please shhhh.

This is probably the only statement from Iceberg that I'd be satisfied with. For the love of Jesus' sphincter, shut the fuck up about this physical violence bullshit zetsumei.

This is probably the only statement from Iceberg that I'd be satisfied with. For the love of Jesus' sphincter, shut the fuck up about this physical violence bullshit zetsumei.


I love you too Joan

Yeah, but still, 77% and 78% really aren't that good of scores. I personally have never played Advent Rising since i own the ps2 and regretably, the gamecube. I only saw on television and read in magazines this game being shredded by reviewers. Each and every reviewer that rated this game low mentioned something about how much advertising this game had. As I said before advertising influence can only go so far.

Did the ones that rated it nicely (like GamePro's 4.5 out of 5--on par with Oblivion, people!) mention the advertising? GamePro didn't. Like I said before, I like the game, but it's really not good.


Now in defense of FF7, the game was a big step in the FF series as far as presentation, and story telling. The game made a huge leap from the snes and that can not be denied.

A big step? Why? Because it's the first to do the 3-d thing, as well as FMV's? In all honestly, big deal. By then, both 3-d and FMV's had become pretty much SOP in ps1 games.


As far as storyline I think its a matter of opinion. I actually liked the storyline. It wasnt the same old lets return the crystals to save the world/hey Im the main character and Im the chose one, let me get a group of friends and save the world. It was a complicated storyline and was a breath of fresh air imo.

FFVI didn't have the "crystals" storyline either. So why is FFVII such a breath of fresh air? Storywise, I'd prefer the word "convoluted" as opposed to "complicated," but that's just semantics.


As far as the battle system goes, I actually like the materia system. I really didnt have a problem with making an uber team. Whats so bad about that?

So you like pressing X five times and watching the game for ten minutes? That's your uber team, W-Summon, KotR, and Mime. Two of those Materia you can only find if you've looked at a guide or something along those lines--if that isn't complete crap, I'd like you to tell me what is.


The characters were great. As far as cloud he was a departure from the normal rpg main characters who is the chose one and is destined to save the world.

Look at Terra. She bears a major similarity with Cloud, namely an identity crisis. Hers, however, is done far better than Cloud's. Also, the "departure" had already been done, so why should Cloud get any special consideration for being a departure?

Did the ones that rated it nicely (like GamePro's 4.5 out of 5--on par with Oblivion, people!) mention the advertising? GamePro didn't. Like I said before, I like the game, but it's really not good.



A big step? Why? Because it's the first to do the 3-d thing, as well as FMV's? In all honestly, big deal. By then, both 3-d and FMV's had become pretty much SOP in ps1 games.



FFVI didn't have the "crystals" storyline either. So why is FFVII such a breath of fresh air? Storywise, I'd prefer the word "convoluted" as opposed to "complicated," but that's just semantics.



So you like pressing X five times and watching the game for ten minutes? That's your uber team, W-Summon, KotR, and Mime. Two of those Materia you can only find if you've looked at a guide or something along those lines--if that isn't complete crap, I'd like you to tell me what is.



Look at Terra. She bears a major similarity with Cloud, namely an identity crisis. Hers, however, is done far better than Cloud's. Also, the "departure" had already been done, so why should Cloud get any special consideration for being a departure?

IMO the FF series taking a succesful jump into 3D gaming territory is actually a big deal. Alot of companies try and fail making the next gen leap ie. bubsy and earthworm jim

Honestly for me, the whole long summon cinematic didnt bother me too much. I was able to play the game and multi task. Most of the game I was extremely strong so i didnt use summons too much. Actually after playing FF7 and 8, then jumping into 9 and seeing what they did with the summons kind of disappointed me. I guess it all comes down to a matter of taste. As for finding the summons, it really didnt take a guide to do so. There is a thing called "exploration" and using that method would allow someone with the patience to find it.

As for FF6, I never really got a chance to play the game fully. I have it on the ps1 and never really got into it too much so as far as storyline and characters go, I cant comment on them too much. At the time of FF3 for the snes, I was too busy with chrono trigger. So for me, Cloud was a departure from the normal rpg character and the storyline was a breath of fresh air.

Oh god please shut the fuck up. Bullet in my skull fpfft come on please. You really look like an idiot right now, please shhhh.
Onomatopoeias make your point seem less intelligent. I'm not just tossing an insult at you; it's just a piece of advice.

Joan as far as the whole god thing, I put maybe as an honest answer. Would you believe me, no of course not cause you were trying to make a point. Im not the most religious person you'll find around but I know plenty of people who have alot of input as to why the feel there is such a high being. But that is a whole other thread in itself. It was a really bad comparison by the way.
You don't need proof to believe something; you just need a compelling reason, but I'll get to that later.

FF1WithAllThieves, Im not asking everyone to jump on and believe what Im saying or follow my opinion, but I am entitled to beleive what I want.
I never told you to believe the "backscratching"; I merely told you not to throw it out jus because there isn't any concrete evidence.

Am I right or wrong. So you are trying to say because this whole bribe bullshit was brought up, Im suppose to just say yeah that happened and thats the end of the story?
Of course not. But you seem to be dismissing the idea as some bullshit excuse that Prak made up to throw out the reviews. Reviews can be considered when arguing the quality of the game, but it has little bearing, as I've stated before, and not just because there's possibly "backscratching" going on.

I havent completely ruled that out, but with this forum the big thing is proof. I hear that all the time, wheres the proof, back up your argument etc. This is a really bold statement to say such things are going on. Why shouldnt there be some proof.
It isn't as bold a statement as you might think because like I've said numerous times, it's completely legal. In the United States, millions of dollars are contributed for political campaigns by special interest groups. The active segments of these groups are called Political Action Committees, or PACs. PACs raise money and donate it to the election campaigns of many members of Congress in order to influence their legislation. There's substantial evidence that this tactic is successful, too: in the United States, there is no law preventing underage smokers from smoking; the law only prohibits the sale of tobacco products to minors. Well, that makes very little sense, and without numerous contributions for election campaigns, legislators would change this. If you want me to, I can prove that this is exactly the kind of thing that PACs do, and that it's all completely legal (although there's probably some illegal stuff going on too, but that's irrelevant). It's a very similar kind of thing to this "backscratching," so I see no stretch in logic to think that this advertising money thing influences reviews.

So I can easily say FF1WithAllThieves, likes men. Someone asks me to show proof I can say, I dont need proof, men on ocassion like other men and I think FF1WithAllThieves likes men and thats the end of it. No, those aligations can not be brought up without some sort of evidence.
The reason your allegations are completely thrown out the window in this case is that you don't know me at all and nobody has any reason to believe you. It's not so much that you don't have proof as it is that it's extremely obvious you just made that up.

If not then its just speculation.


the idea of the advertising money is a possible explanation for FFVII's reviews.

Oh by the way I could care less if you are getting irritated.
*cries* He doesn't care about me!

Its funny because when the whole issue of bribing was brought up advent rising was one of the games that popped into my head. That game was marketed heavily and from what I remember got pretty mediocre reviews. If I remember correctly this game even had a money give away sweepstakes.
If you remember correctly? What if you don't? There's not a compelling reason to believe you, so in this case you need proof.

In other forms of media, movies like waterworld who were heavily marketed and the budgets were big, tanked and were reviewed harshly. Its not always the case where big games, movies etc get the best ratings.

Last time I checked, movies didn't advertise in reviewing magazines, so there was no money involved for publishers and editors by giving favorable reviews.

Take another game like NBA 07 the show, it has Kobe on the cover and has mutliple ads on tv, web sites and magazines and it was given bad reviews. Obviously there was alot of money involved. Alot of games with alot of money involved in its production and promotion dont always get high ratings.
NBA 07 is just another sports game that wasn't expected to be anything big. However, I will give you that FFVII is probably a better game than NBA 07, although I've never played NBA 07. NBA 07 may have just been below the quality limit, and reviewers had to give it bad reviews to maintain credibility. I would be able to argue this point better if I had ever played NBA 07, TBH.

Games with the big budgets usually come out better than low budget games because better teams are assembled to make them. Is this not true?
I'm sure this is true in general, but didn't you just say NBA 07 had a huge budget involved and got bad reviews anyway?

Sometimes you have games that have tiny budgets and no promotion and come out to be sleeper hits. For example, katamari damacy and the original wario ware.
I've never played those games, but you just switched sides again. Are you trying to say that budget does or doesn't influence a game's quality? And I already know there are exceptions to whichever you say, although that doesn't necessarily discredit your point. Just make up your mind.

In halos case, I know a shitload of people who would argue to the death on how good that game is. It recieved high ratings but a shit load of people actually love that game and they have strong opinions and facts to back them up.
I know people that would defend it, too. I can't really argue about Halo as I'm just not a big fan of FPS games, nor do I own a new-generation console, so I really don't know much about Halo.

To say its over rated IMO is actually a matter of opinion.
Of course it is, but that doesn't mean you can't provide a very convincing argument as to whether a game is overrated.

Compare it to alot of FPS games and it stands out pretty well.
I believe that's because FPS games are pure shit, but that's kind of irrelevant.

Now in defense of FF7, the game was a big step in the FF series as far as presentation, and story telling. The game made a huge leap from the snes and that can not be denied.
In presentation, yes, the graphics were better, but that was simply because they had a better console to work with. Actually, I attribute many of the game's flaws to the fact that Square was just learning what they could do with the new PS. However, the midi in FFVII is awful; FFVI had much better midi sound quality: another thing I attribute to the new system. As for storytelling, how do you say the PS provided for better possibilities?

As far as storyline I think its a matter of opinion. I actually liked the storyline.
Yes, it's a matter of opinion, but as I said, opinions are debatable.

It wasnt the same old lets return the crystals to save the world/hey Im the main character and Im the chose one, let me get a group of friends and save the world.
You mostly seem to be referring to FFIV, but I'll address that one in a bit. In the mean time, what about FFVI? Where were the crystals in that game? Also, Terra may have been "the chosen one" at the beginning, but she shifts out of the focus as the game progresses. In the end, actually, Celes becomes the point of focus. FFVI's story was hardly typical at all, and FFVII didn't make a leap in storyline from it in any way.
As for FFIV, the central plotline is pretty basic, but there's a whole lot more behind that basic plotline. Cecil has to overcome his past deeds and embrace the role of the hero on Mt. Ordeals, and he (spoiler if you haven't played FFIV at all) even has to bring himself to face his best friend, Kain.
FFVII, on the other hand, had a somewhat disconnected plotline. Cloud is first a mercenary without a motive helping AVALANCHE; suddenly, Cloud finds out Sephiroth returned and immediately comes to the conclusion that killing Sephiroth will save the planet. Forget about the Shinra; if they kill Sephiroth, the planet will be automatically saved. Do you see the lack of connection? I'm not saying FFVII's plot completely sucked balls, (although Prak probably is) but the plot certainly isn't as good as many have hailed it to be.

It was a complicated storyline and was a breath of fresh air imo.
FFVII definitely did not have a complicated storyline in comparison.
In FFVI, Terra first ultimately makes the decision to help the Returners, a desperate group fighting a millitant Empire. But soon, Kefka finds incredible power and the party realizes that they are the only ones who can stop him.
FFVII's plot does not have that kind of twist; for nearly the whole game, the party is simply chasing after Sephiroth and trying to kill him. So Aeris dies in the process; that only solidifies their goal. Cloud ha an identity crisis. Well, tough luck there, but he comes out OK and they go back after Sephiroth again. In the end, they find out that Meteor can be stopped, but wait, they have to kill Sephiroth to release Holy. The whole plot is just about killing Sephiroth. It's not too horribly bad, but it certainly doesn't make for a complex plot.

As far as the battle system goes, I actually like the materia system. I really didnt have a problem with making an uber team. Whats so bad about that?
The characters lose their individual value. To me, the materia system was an experiment that turned out OK, but not incredibly well. Actually, I liked it too, but that's because I always choose my characters for silly reasons anyway.

The characters were great. As far as cloud he was a departure from the normal rpg main characters who is the chose one and is destined to save the world.
That doesn't necessarily make him a good character. He was pretty badly developed and merely acted as an archetype of a strong, silent type. The game had a great opportunity to develop his character when showing his past, but instead it just told you more of what you knew about him and told you how his memories were faulty. His character was improperly developed, as were many of the others.

Was it my favorite rpg, no but it was a damn good game IMO. So do I agree with the article saying greatest games of all time, for the game it is and what it did for rpg gaming, yes it belongs amongst the best. Go ahead start the scrutiny/ insults.
You get no insults from me because you're just stating your opinion, and your opinion, while it has no bearing on a debate - a truly skilled debatist can win a debate in favor of the argument he doesn't believe in - is entirely up to you. Furthermore, you don't say it's the greatest RPG of all time, which shows you are willing to listen to reason. Behind all the bad arguments you've made, you do have a decently respectable brain, you know.

Onomatopoeias make your point seem less intelligent. I'm not just tossing an insult at you; it's just a piece of advice.

You don't need proof to believe something; you just need a compelling reason, but I'll get to that later.

I never told you to believe the "backscratching"; I merely told you not to throw it out jus because there isn't any concrete evidence.

Of course not. But you seem to be dismissing the idea as some bullshit excuse that Prak made up to throw out the reviews. Reviews can be considered when arguing the quality of the game, but it has little bearing, as I've stated before, and not just because there's possibly "backscratching" going on.

It isn't as bold a statement as you might think because like I've said numerous times, it's completely legal. In the United States, millions of dollars are contributed for political campaigns by special interest groups. The active segments of these groups are called Political Action Committees, or PACs. PACs raise money and donate it to the election campaigns of many members of Congress in order to influence their legislation. There's substantial evidence that this tactic is successful, too: in the United States, there is no law preventing underage smokers from smoking; the law only prohibits the sale of tobacco products to minors. Well, that makes very little sense, and without numerous contributions for election campaigns, legislators would change this. If you want me to, I can prove that this is exactly the kind of thing that PACs do, and that it's all completely legal (although there's probably some illegal stuff going on too, but that's irrelevant). It's a very similar kind of thing to this "backscratching," so I see no stretch in logic to think that this advertising money thing influences reviews.

The reason your allegations are completely thrown out the window in this case is that you don't know me at all and nobody has any reason to believe you. It's not so much that you don't have proof as it is that it's extremely obvious you just made that up.


the idea of the advertising money is a possible explanation for FFVII's reviews.

*cries* He doesn't care about me!

If you remember correctly? What if you don't? There's not a compelling reason to believe you, so in this case you need proof.

Last time I checked, movies didn't advertise in reviewing magazines, so there was no money involved for publishers and editors by giving favorable reviews.

NBA 07 is just another sports game that wasn't expected to be anything big. However, I will give you that FFVII is probably a better game than NBA 07, although I've never played NBA 07. NBA 07 may have just been below the quality limit, and reviewers had to give it bad reviews to maintain credibility. I would be able to argue this point better if I had ever played NBA 07, TBH.

I'm sure this is true in general, but didn't you just say NBA 07 had a huge budget involved and got bad reviews anyway?

I've never played those games, but you just switched sides again. Are you trying to say that budget does or doesn't influence a game's quality? And I already know there are exceptions to whichever you say, although that doesn't necessarily discredit your point. Just make up your mind.

I know people that would defend it, too. I can't really argue about Halo as I'm just not a big fan of FPS games, nor do I own a new-generation console, so I really don't know much about Halo.

Of course it is, but that doesn't mean you can't provide a very convincing argument as to whether a game is overrated.

I believe that's because FPS games are pure shit, but that's kind of irrelevant.

In presentation, yes, the graphics were better, but that was simply because they had a better console to work with. Actually, I attribute many of the game's flaws to the fact that Square was just learning what they could do with the new PS. However, the midi in FFVII is awful; FFVI had much better midi sound quality: another thing I attribute to the new system. As for storytelling, how do you say the PS provided for better possibilities?

Yes, it's a matter of opinion, but as I said, opinions are debatable.

You mostly seem to be referring to FFIV, but I'll address that one in a bit. In the mean time, what about FFVI? Where were the crystals in that game? Also, Terra may have been "the chosen one" at the beginning, but she shifts out of the focus as the game progresses. In the end, actually, Celes becomes the point of focus. FFVI's story was hardly typical at all, and FFVII didn't make a leap in storyline from it in any way.
As for FFIV, the central plotline is pretty basic, but there's a whole lot more behind that basic plotline. Cecil has to overcome his past deeds and embrace the role of the hero on Mt. Ordeals, and he (spoiler if you haven't played FFIV at all) even has to bring himself to face his best friend, Kain.
FFVII, on the other hand, had a somewhat disconnected plotline. Cloud is first a mercenary without a motive helping AVALANCHE; suddenly, Cloud finds out Sephiroth returned and immediately comes to the conclusion that killing Sephiroth will save the planet. Forget about the Shinra; if they kill Sephiroth, the planet will be automatically saved. Do you see the lack of connection? I'm not saying FFVII's plot completely sucked balls, (although Prak probably is) but the plot certainly isn't as good as many have hailed it to be.

FFVII definitely did not have a complicated storyline in comparison.
In FFVI, Terra first ultimately makes the decision to help the Returners, a desperate group fighting a millitant Empire. But soon, Kefka finds incredible power and the party realizes that they are the only ones who can stop him.
FFVII's plot does not have that kind of twist; for nearly the whole game, the party is simply chasing after Sephiroth and trying to kill him. So Aeris dies in the process; that only solidifies their goal. Cloud ha an identity crisis. Well, tough luck there, but he comes out OK and they go back after Sephiroth again. In the end, they find out that Meteor can be stopped, but wait, they have to kill Sephiroth to release Holy. The whole plot is just about killing Sephiroth. It's not too horribly bad, but it certainly doesn't make for a complex plot.

The characters lose their individual value. To me, the materia system was an experiment that turned out OK, but not incredibly well. Actually, I liked it too, but that's because I always choose my characters for silly reasons anyway.

That doesn't necessarily make him a good character. He was pretty badly developed and merely acted as an archetype of a strong, silent type. The game had a great opportunity to develop his character when showing his past, but instead it just told you more of what you knew about him and told you how his memories were faulty. His character was improperly developed, as were many of the others.

You get no insults from me because you're just stating your opinion, and your opinion, while it has no bearing on a debate - a truly skilled debatist can win a debate in favor of the argument he doesn't believe in - is entirely up to you. Furthermore, you don't say it's the greatest RPG of all time, which shows you are willing to listen to reason. Behind all the bad arguments you've made, you do have a decently respectable brain, you know.

My allegations don�t get thrown out the window (although I don�t really think you like men) because I don�t know you, you�re right but do you guys know anyone who reviewed FF7? Were you sitting next to them when the reviews were written? I would assume not. So how can you tell with what bias or what motives they had while writing the review? Were you there with them when they played the game? No, so how can you tell if they genuinely enjoyed the game? You said the advertising money is a �possible� explanation for the reviews. It�s not a concrete explanation, therefore its holds little bearings.

You want proof of the advent rising sweepstakes, here http://www.gamespot.com/news/6131530.html?q=advent%20rising. The contest was scrapped but it did exist.

Movies don�t advertise in any reviewing magazines? That�s odd, they don�t advertise in entertainment weekly, or maxim or any other magazines? These magazines do give movie reviews if I�m not mistaken.

As for switching sides on my argument, I was merely showing both sides of the coin. Games with big budgets such as FF7, Halo etc. usually come out better because the game is being made with much better resources. The reason I switched sides was to show this doesn�t always happen, and games with small budgets ie. Katamari damacy and wario ware can outshine other games. But you do have the occasional game like advent rising who is marketed heavily and reviewed pretty badly and just suck.

As for fps, most console fps games suck. Pc ones are usually better.

Opinions are debatable, debate away. Just ask people to leave the insults at home. They are not needed.

As for finding the summons, it really didnt take a guide to do so. There is a thing called "exploration" and using that method would allow someone with the patience to find it.

Crap. Utter crap. You mean to imply that you found KotR's island by "exploration?" Without knowing exactly where to look for it, it'd require an absurd amount of luck to spot the island. The other "Materia Caves" I can understand exploring for, but not KotR's.


As for FF6, I never really got a chance to play the game fully.

I hope you realize that statement completely invalidates your "fresh air" point.


IMO the FF series taking a succesful jump into 3D gaming territory is actually a big deal. Alot of companies try and fail making the next gen leap ie. bubsy and earthworm jim

And why does that matter? As I've said, 3d games were SOP by the time FFVII was released; 3d games had been released for over a year by late '97.


You want proof of the advent rising sweepstakes, here http://www.gamespot.com/news/6131530...dvent%20rising. The contest was scrapped but it did exist.

What exactly does the scrapped contest have to do with anything? While we're at it, congrats on completely ignoring me posting about GamePro's review.

edit: btw, GamePro gave AR the same score as they did Oblivion. I've said that already, but since it was so conviently ignored...

Crap. Utter crap. You mean to imply that you found KotR's island by "exploration?" Without knowing exactly where to look for it, it'd require an absurd amount of luck to spot the island. The other "Materia Caves" I can understand exploring for, but not KotR's.



I hope you realize that statement completely invalidates your "fresh air" point.



And why does that matter? As I've said, 3d games were SOP by the time FFVII was released; 3d games had been released for over a year by late '97.



What exactly does the scrapped contest have to do with anything? While we're at it, congrats on completely ignoring me posting about GamePro's review.

edit: btw, GamePro gave AR the same score as they did Oblivion. I've said that already, but since it was so conviently ignored...

I found Kotor on my own. I actually bought the FF7 strategy guide about 3 years ago in barnes and noble. Believe me or not, I did.

Yes there were 3D games before FF7, but a good rpg, in 3D? Plus for an individual company going from one platform to another can either make or break them. And it was important that they nailed it and IMO they did.

Ok so my fresh air point goes down the drain. Point taken.

The scrapped contest was brought up cause I was asked to to show proof of it.

Your statement was not ignored on purpose. I honestly didnt notice it as it wasnt directed towards me, sorry. I actually lost all faith in gamepro. Growing up I was subscribed to them but they became a shit magazine. Look at what IGN and gamespot gave advent rising. They gave it really bad reviews. These are the sites that are usually given a bad rap at this forum. Oblivion was obviously leaps and bounds above advent rising.

I found Kotor on my own. I actually bought the FF7 strategy guide about 3 years ago in barnes and noble. Believe me or not, I did.

Yes there were 3D games before FF7, but a good rpg, in 3D? Plus for an individual company going from one platform to another can either make or break them. And it was important that they nailed it and IMO they did.

Ok so my fresh air point goes down the drain. Point taken.

The scrapped contest was brought up cause I was asked to to show proof of it.

Your statement was not ignored on purpose. I honestly didnt notice it as it wasnt directed towards me, sorry. I actually lost all faith in gamepro. Growing up I was subscribed to them but they became a shit magazine. Look at what IGN and gamespot game advent rising. They gave it really bad reviews. These are the sites that are usually given a bad rap at this forum. Oblivion was obviously leaps and bounds above advent rising.

just to let you know...there are no real 3D games
they're projected onto a 2D surface, so how can 3 dimensions exist ona plane that only has 2?
and, to be honest, FF7 failed to even simulate a 3D environment (i.e. they did hardly anything cutscene-wise to show that the spaces they created were meant to be in a sense 3-dimensional)
to cut back to one of your earlier posts...FF7 was a step BACK in terms of story telling and was not even close in terms of presentation as FF6 was, the music was simplistic compared to Seiken Densetsu, FF6, and FF4, the materia system took away the strategy in battles as each character could be equipped in similar fashions, thus taking character selection down to prefrence rather than necessity
if there's anything that FF7 revolutionized, it was a revolution in successfully marketing and selling utter bullshit

Yes there were 3D games before FF7, but a good rpg, in 3D? Plus for an individual company going from one platform to another can either make or break them. And it was important that they nailed it and IMO they did.

Exactly what does the genre of a particular game has to do with the 2d/3d transition? Like I've said twice now, 3-d was SOP by the time FFVII was released. A hundred development teams made the transition by late '97.


Oblivion was obviously leaps and bounds above advent rising.

And thus my point is validated.

3 months, and 24 pages later, you're all still fighting over someone else's opinion...

Exactly what does the genre of a particular game has to do with the 2d/3d transition? Like I've said twice now, 3-d was SOP by the time FFVII was released. A hundred development teams made the transition by late '97.



And thus my point is validated.


The genre of a game might not have to do alot with its transition but
imo with rpgs it means a lot. Take a look at the sports genre. Maddens
transition from snes/genesis to ps1/saturn/ 64 was not the smoothest.
But why does the football genre continue to be successful even though
its most popular franchise sucked at the time, because people love
football. People play the sport on a recreational basis and they watch
it at home on the television. They even bet on the sport. So what
happens, gameday comes along and steals maddens thunder. Gameday
becomes succesful anyway and the football game genre is still alive. Ea had to take a year off to perfect madden. But the genre still remained popular because football has worldwide appeal so regardless of what title is on the market it will always be a healthy genre. In the case of rpgs, it doesn't have mass appeal. Most people didn't even own an rpg for the nes unless you count zelda. If that's even considered an rpg as some people do. The snes comes along with some great titles chrono trigger, ff6 etc but the genre isn't extremely popluar. Most people known for playing these games are labled geeks, or nerds. The next gen comes along. Ps1 is very popluar but before ff7 hits what's the most popluar rpg franchise at the time? Anyone know? Ff7 hits and opens everyones eyes to the rpg genre. Blame the marketing if you want, but it was a huge success. Rpgs now start to gain mass appeal. More and more people are playing games now. As every next gen system comes out and games evolve, we get more and
more gamers. Of course the jump from one console to the next is important. In rpgs defense it was huge that ff7 was successful. After the ff series, what's the next most popular us rpg series. I feel if ff fails the rpg genre will go under the radar again. Ff is the flagship title for the genre. Most people think ff they think rpg. Alot of credit has to be given to ff7 for that. If its jump to 3d/ next gen wasn't successful who knows where the series or the genre would be. Of course this is what I feel about the topic, many will disagree. I'm ready for the backlash now lol.Ok so oblivion was rated the same as advent rising. We already proved that the games with the most marketing aren't always the most succesful, with advent rising being a specific example. What's the point you are getting at? Maybe the reviewer at gamepro actually thought it was a good game. All reviewers don't always agree. For example, I read a lot of reviews and ill use pokemon dungeon for example. I've seen reviews go from the game is highly addicitive to the game is boring as shit. Mind you this game was marketed pretty well with many magazine ads and tv ads. Reviewers don't always agree. Look at other reviews for advent rising on other sites and search for an oblivion review at the same site other than gamepro of course.

sorry for post looking shitty but I emailed response from my sidekick while I was on train and Im too lazy to fix lol.

Yes there were 3D games before FF7, but a good rpg, in 3D? Plus for an individual company going from one platform to another can either make or break them. And it was important that they nailed it and IMO they did.

Super Mario RPG. :P

Super Mario RPG. :P

Good example if most people would consider that but thats one game. Did it bring rpgs into the mainstream?

you mentioned a few but you mislabeled what is probably a better-selling franchise than final fantasy (i.e. Zelda...namely A Link to the Past)

as for your notion that there are more and more people playing games...it's not because of FF7...it's because of population growth, convenience (meaning...people have more time to kill because they can perform daily tasks quicker), both parents working (i.e. they buy kids video games for the instant gratification factor), etc.

if you ask me, i find it funny that Square tries to label their games as rpgs...
and if you ask me...i think it'd be better if the rpg industry went under the radar again, at least we wouldn't have to deal with all the mainstream bullshit that Square packs into their games
Square has done NOTHING aside from create games that are nothing more than interactive storybooks

rpgs were intended to be played towards no specific goal of "winning"...so they can't end
nor were they intended to be played under pre-determined stories...the players themselves created the story as they went

the allegations that you made concerning ff7 "opening the rpg genre" need to be backed by EVIDENCE...not heresay

*edit*
Good example if most people would consider that but thats one game. Did it bring rpgs into the mainstream?
what pure, untainted evidence do you have that clearly states that ff7 is what brought rpgs into the mainstream?

you mentioned a few but you mislabeled what is probably a better-selling franchise than final fantasy (i.e. Zelda...namely A Link to the Past)

as for your notion that there are more and more people playing games...it's not because of FF7...it's because of population growth, convenience (meaning...people have more time to kill because they can perform daily tasks quicker), both parents working (i.e. they buy kids video games for the instant gratification factor), etc.

if you ask me, i find it funny that Square tries to label their games as rpgs...
and if you ask me...i think it'd be better if the rpg industry went under the radar again, at least we wouldn't have to deal with all the mainstream bullshit that Square packs into their games
Square has done NOTHING aside from create games that are nothing more than interactive storybooks

rpgs were intended to be played towards no specific goal of "winning"...so they can't end
nor were they intended to be played under pre-determined stories...the players themselves created the story as they went

the allegations that you made concerning ff7 "opening the rpg genre" need to be backed by EVIDENCE...not heresay

*edit*
what pure, untainted evidence do you have that clearly states that ff7 is what brought rpgs into the mainstream?

I never said more people are playing games because of FF7. I said more and more people are playing games and the jump to next gen is important.

Not only does square regard their games as rpgs, but magazines and stores do so to.

Name another rpg that brought rpgs into mainstream.

just to let you know...there are no real 3D games
they're projected onto a 2D surface, so how can 3 dimensions exist ona plane that only has 2?
and, to be honest, FF7 failed to even simulate a 3D environment (i.e. they did hardly anything cutscene-wise to show that the spaces they created were meant to be in a sense 3-dimensional)

Its annoying when people get technical about things that really don't matter. Like when people complain about the real definition of an RPG. The definition people use is slang. If your not smart enough to know what someones talking about when they call a game like FFX 3-d and a game like Super Mario 2-d then you are probably not intelligent enough to be on forums.


the music was simplistic compared to Seiken Densetsu, FF6, and FF4, the materia system took away the strategy in battles

Simply saying a game has better music then another game without backing it up gives you as much credibility as a fanboy who says " FFVII IS THE BEST GAME EVR!!" I havent played all of the FF games, but I can say that all of the ones I have played have taken litte strategy, not counting FFT. I don't call training your hero for shitloads of hours and then destroying a boss with pure strength, skill. I have used this "strategy" on all FF games i have played (FIV, FVII,FVIII,FX) and so far they have worked.


if there's anything that FF7 revolutionized, it was a revolution in successfully marketing and selling utter bullshit

Again pure opinion until proven with facts.

Ff7 hits and opens everyones eyes to the rpg genre. Blame the marketing if you want, but it was a huge success. Rpgs now start to gain mass appeal. More and more people are playing games now.

so...i guess that transition needs a little work then right?


I never said more people are playing games because of FF7. I said more and more people are playing games and the jump to next gen is important.

Not only does square regard their games as rpgs, but magazines and stores do so to.

Name another rpg that brought rpgs into mainstream.
uhh...just to let you know...rpgs aren't in the mainstream...
if you still wanna argue then you'd have to admit that rpgs are of the same caliber and material as sex, drugs, violence, rap, and the like

usually in the case of conforming to the mainstream, peer pressure is used
do you see kids getting pressured into playing video games on a daily basis?...no
did you see ff7 featured in the mainstream media and it's associates as a game of phenomenal social impact?...no...that went to GTA and the whole "video games make kids violent" argument
(commerials and ads don't count as they're paid for by the game producers)

*edit*

Its annoying when people get technical about things that really don't matter. Like when people complain about the real definition of an RPG. The definition people use is slang. If your not smart enough to know what someones talking about when they call a game like FFX 3-d and a game like Super Mario 2-d then you are probably not intelligent enough to be on forums.



Simply saying a game has better music then another game without backing it up gives you as much credibility as a fanboy who says " FFVII IS THE BEST GAME EVR!!" I havent played all of the FF games, but I can say that all of the ones I have played have taken litte strategy, not counting FFT. I don't call training your hero for shitloads of hours and then destroying a boss with pure strength, skill. I have used this "strategy" on all FF games i have played (FIV, FVII,FVIII,FX) and so far they have worked.



Again pure opinion until proven with facts.

i notice that FF6 is missing from your list

and if you're not capable of comprehending that 3-dimensions can't exist on a 2-dimensional plane then you need to go to school and spend less time on forums

just to let you know...i'm double majoring in Music and Physics...so both of the arguments posed in the post you referenced to have more weight than your accusations as to their validity

*edit
double post...curse this blackberry

so...i guess that transition needs a little work then right?


uhh...just to let you know...rpgs aren't in the mainstream...
if you still wanna argue then you'd have to admit that rpgs are of the same caliber and material as sex, drugs, violence, rap, and the like

usually in the case of conforming to the mainstream, peer pressure is used
do you see kids getting pressured into playing video games on a daily basis?...no
did you see ff7 featured in the mainstream media and it's associates as a game of phenomenal social impact?...no...that went to GTA and the whole "video games make kids violent" argument
(commerials and ads don't count as they're paid for by the game producers)

In your opinion it needs work.

Selling millions of copies is considered a mainstream success. I really dont know what your definition of mainstream is lol.

In your opinion it needs work.

Selling millions of copies is considered a mainstream success.

so you go from referencing the hit that ff7 was...and you move immediately to say that there are more people playing games

as for selling millions of copies...think about it...the same goes for just about anything that roots deep enough in a good population

in order for ff7 to be considered a mainstream success, it would have to touch on a part of just about everyone's life...thus the nomenclature MAINSTREAM
to give an example of this, the band Insane Clown Posse has also sold millions of records but is not considered to be mainstream as their music does not play significantly into the lives of people that are surveyed
the same can be said of ff7...it's advertisements were not on the radio/tv everyday

get out of the house more Iceberg and take a look at what's around you...even back then, people everywhere weren't buzzing about ff7...there was more of a buzz about the sentencing of Timothy McVeigh than the hype over ff7

so you go from referencing the hit that ff7 was...and you move immediately to say that there are more people playing games

as for selling millions of copies...think about it...the same goes for just about anything that roots deep enough in a good population

in order for ff7 to be considered a mainstream success, it would have to touch on a part of just about everyone's life...thus the nomenclature MAINSTREAM
to give an example of this, the band Insane Clown Posse has also sold millions of records but is not considered to be mainstream as their music does not play significantly into the lives of people that are surveyed
the same can be said of ff7...it's advertisements were not on the radio/tv everyday

get out of the house more Iceberg and take a look at what's around you...even back then, people everywhere weren't buzzing about ff7...there was more of a buzz about the sentencing of Timothy McVeigh than the hype over ff7

A nationwide tragedy does not compare to a videogame, bad example.

Insane clown posse did sell millions of records? I must have missed that.

FF7 wasnt on tv everyday? So what was the heavy marketing blitz everyones bitching about?

i notice that FF6 is missing from your list
True, I heard around that it is a great game but i rarely see it and when i do it is jacked up to a high price because it's considered "rare". I heard they were remaking it for the GBA a while ago so I'm planning on wating till it's released.



and if you're not capable of comprehending that 3-dimensions can't exist on a 2-dimensional plane then you need to go to school and spend less time on forums

I recomend the same if you don't know what slang is.
Luckily though I do know the technical definition of 3-d and i do go to school.

just to let you know...i'm double majoring in Music and Physics...so both of the arguments posed in the post you referenced to have more weight than your accusations as to their validity
Maybe. I've known many teachers and people who suck at what they do. Just because someone goes to college doesn't mean they are smarter than someone who doesn't. Although I can't say that for you since I don't know you.

True, I heard around that it is a great game but i rarely see it and when i do is jacked up to a high price because it's "rare". I heard they were remaking it for the GBA a while ago so I'm planning on wating till it's released.




I recomend the same if you don't know what slang is.

just to let you know...i'm double majoring in Music and Physics...so both of the arguments posed in the post you referenced to have more weight than your accusations as to their validity

Maybe. I've known many teachers and people who suck at what they do. Just because someone goes to college doesn't mean they are smarter than someone who doesn't. Although I can't say that for you since I don't know you.

slang isn't always right my friend :-P
fyi...i don't go around flaunting my education, i was using it as an crutch for my argument in order to give it validity

slang isn't always right my friend :-P
fyi...i don't go around flaunting my education, i was using it as an crutch for my argument in order to give it validity

very true, Ghetto people pretty much butchered slang. But what icebrerg was speaking of wasn't a matter of right or wrong, it was a matter of knowing what he was talking about.

very true. For example, anything that comes from a ghetto person's mouth.

yup...which is why i try to avoid slang whenever possible :D

The whole point about FFVII introducing the RPG genre to the masses is rather unimportant, FYI. In fact, I argue that Square sacrificed some of the better qualities of the FF series in adapting it for a larger audience.

yup...which is why i try to avoid slang whenever possible :D

Good for you, down with ghetto people.

Good for you, down with ghetto people.

they're already pretty rundown as is...what more can be done?

The whole point about FFVII introducing the RPG genre to the masses is rather unimportant, FYI. In fact, I argue that Square sacrificed some of the better qualities of the FF series in adapting it for a larger audience.

It is important for the company. The companies popualrity grew after FF7. That means nothing?

they're already pretty rundown as is...what more can be done?

*Grabs 12 guage* well....


It is important for the company. The companies popualrity grew after FF7. That means nothing?

It means something. Not saying they couldn't have done alot better but hey, it got the job done.

It is important for the company. The companies popualrity grew after FF7. That means nothing?

Oh, it's certainly important for the company. I meant it isn't important for the purposes of this debate, as we're specifically arguing whether popularity and high reviews tell accurately what the quality of FFVII is. None of us will dispute that the game is popular.

*Grabs 12 guage* well....



It means something. Not saying they couldn't have done alot better but hey, it got the job done.

In business a company can always do better. Im pretty sure Bill Gate is still looking for ways to improve to make his company more money. They are never satisfied.

It is important for the company. The companies popualrity grew after FF7. That means nothing?

it grew...then it was bought out by Enix (as for their motives for the buy-out, i'm not sure...but i KNOW that Square was assimilated by Enix)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_Enix

it's in the first paragraph of that entry
Square holders got .81 and Enix shareholders recieved a full 1-to-1 trade
in case you want to argue that the president of SquareEnix was the president of Square...i'll let you know that the direction and vision of a corporatation are not dictated by the president but by the shareholders

In business a company can always do better. Im pretty sure Bill Gate is still looking for ways to improve to make his company more money. They are never satisfied.

Of course, they need to improve to keep up with competition. Without competition, our society would go no where.

Of course, they need to improve to keep up with competition. Without competition, our society would go no where.


Competition is what makes business go round lol. Its a very healthy aspect to our economy.