Disclaimer: The opinions expressed within this column are those of the participants and the moderator, and do not necessarily reflect those of the GIA. There is coarse language and potentially offensive material afoot. I could really go for a tuna melt right now. Don't say we didn't warn you.

Well, lessee. Over the weekend RPGamer put up an interesting translation of a Famitsu interview with Yuji Horii, game designer for the Dragon Quest series. The topic was DQVII, of course, and the most interesting exchange was probably this:

Famitsu: Is the expectation for Dragon Quest VII the same as its previous titles?
Horii: A Dragon Quest title has been following the Dragon Quest rules, but that may not be becoming the convention now. Recently, RPGs that "Show" have become dominant, and you can enjoy it passively. Aren't these games really more for the beginner? In contrast to this, you have to do things on your own in Dragon Quest, be active, so maybe it's quite a hardcore game. This is what I've been thinking recently.

I hesitate to read too much into this, but it does seem as if Horii's been approaching this game with the mindset a lot of his defenders have been attributing to him - less narrative ("Show"), more immersive ("Active"). There's a ton of questions this brings up, such as "How do you expect to institute more "active" games, when the whole genre's been locked on the FF "show" model for the past three years?" And I'm not a beginner, but I like the "Show" style. Will DQVII exclude me?

On the other hand, given that everybody and their dog has been following the FF model, it might be nice to see somebody, anybody, try something different. As I've said before, I don't find the menu-based battle gameplay in most RPGs to be that interesting, so I'm curious as to what Horii can put in this game to make "active" == "enjoyable". And I truly wish Famitsu had swatted the man upside the head for taking so long. But I guess all will be revealed come August.

I've also been giving a bit of thought to something AK talked about this weekend - letters guidelines. It's been in the back of my mind to put up some sort of column FAQ about this, because while there's a certain amount of whim that goes in to my letters selections, there's also certain guidelines I try to go by. (I'd probably also mention things like when I do the column, and when letters sent in at a certain time would be liable to be put up.) But the question is, would such a FAQ be useful and informative to you guys, or would the codification of hard guidelines take the last spark of spontaneity out of the column? Give me some feedback on this, please.

Onward.

To the best of my knowledge, the Famitsu reviews have the same basic format as the EGM reviews - a number, and a very short blurb from each reviewer. (Of course, Famitsu came first.) Since it's hard to say anything concrete in 50-odd words, the blurbs end up being simple statements of opinion, with little real analysis. Thus, the only tangible things you can pull from Famitsu reviews are the numbers - no big loss, in my opinion.

While I don't much like the tone of your letter, I gotta admit you make some valid points. In fact, it weren't for one serious, major flaw, you'd have harpooned all that is good and Square in the world.

The flaw? The gamers who go into such a frenzy are a tinypart of Square's target audience.

Think about it for a second. Yes, I care a good bit about even tiny scraps of info. Before I got this job, I visited the GIA daily, hoping for such drips of info from the corporate dam. I still visit the site, and I suspect I'd be doing the same thing even if I hadn't got the job. The same is probably true of each of the readers of this column, and of the site as a whole. But that number isn't anywhere near as big as Square needs it to be - a few tens of thousands, at most, whereas FFIX has a sales target in the millions.

Even if you argue that, say, everyone who bought a copy of FFT (~150,000) is the kind of rabid fan you describe, that's still a relatively small percentage of the million+ who bought FFVIII. It's those casual gamers who Square's marketing department is really targeting, and it's not targeting them with early-release movies and the names of towns. Square will try to sell to those people when the game is a week or so away from US release, with magazine ads and MTV ads and posters in every Babbage's in the country. It will not be easy, and it will not be cheap for them. I don't think they're laughing as much as you believe.

That still leaves the question of why fans, like me, like many readers, are so fanatic about a new Final Fantasy release when only tiny pieces of info are out. And I think the reason we are so excited would have to be FF's reputation for quality. I can think of no other series in any genre, in any medium,  that has come close to consistently providing the same level of class as Final Fantasy. Others may disagree, but I have yet to play a new FF that didn't wow me for the whole game, so I have faith that the next game won't let me down. In a way, the info released so far is an affirmation of that faith, because I see nothing that doesn't strike me as innovative and well done. Yeah, I'm a Square shill, but it's worth it.

I never actually used the warp technique that much, despite being vaguely aware of it for a while. Combat in MGS was a blast, so I never really wanted to avoid it. But just for your edification, here goes. There are three boxes in the game, and three locations where trucks are parked with the tailgates opened: The heliport at the beginning, the NBC building in the middle, and the snowfield at the end of the game. Each of the three boxes has a corresponding label on it. To warp around, simply go one of the trucks, select the other location you want to go to by hiding in the appropriate box, and wait a minute. A guard will come by, see only boxes, and drive the truck to where you wanted to go. Viola, transport without messy shootouts!

My musical tastes are way more varied than most of what's been talked about so far - I like the Pumpkins (and yes, I'm sorry for spelling Corgan as Corrigan) but I also like music that would send Billy screaming into the night. And the big shocker, I don't really like Metal. As an adult, I can tolerate it, but as a kid I considered it the music of brain-dead punk wannabes who couldn't read a book to save their lives. (Metal was also the mainstream where I grew up, so it was much more interesting not to be a fan.) So thanks for your offer, sir, but I'm perfectly happy with what I've got.

And just in case you are interested, here's a list of the CDs I listened to today: Steve Earle, Transcendental Blues; Sting, Brand New Day; Music From and Inspired by King of the Hill; Joe Satriani, Time Machine; Sarah McLachlan, Mirrorball; The Simpsons, Songs in the Key of Springfield; and Mark Knopfler, Music from Wag the Dog. I don't claim to have great taste, and I'm not saying all of these are high art, but I like what I like. Deal with it.

As much joy as it brings to my heart that one of my readers has found contentment for a brief while, I wouldn't be much of a columnist if I didn't post something immediately following this to break the mood. Sorry, X.

There's a chain of logic here that doesn't work real well, and seems to go like this:

Final Fantasy I does not live up to current RPG standards.
Therefore, Final Fantasy I does not deserve any respect.

The premise is basically sound, I think - I'm sure I'll get at least one letter saying how much better FFI plays without all the story, graphics, music, and gameplay extras latter FFs tacked on, but by and large I think we can all agree that FFIX is liable to be more enjoyable. But that in no way negates how good FFI was at the time it was released.

Frex, I still prefer the combat system to DQ. The world was quite colorful, and the quest was HUGE, for the time. Even the plot was pretty decent, compared to most other NES games. I liked playing it, and my fondness for the game led me to drop nearly $80 on FFIV on sight, one of the best purchases I've ever made. Bottom line is, expecting FFI to stand up to modern games is as smart as expecting a Sopwith Camel to be able to outfight an F-16, which is to say, not real bright.

Good golly gosh, there's been a hellacious amount of fallout over Nich's review. But here's the thing - although I haven't played the game myself, I'm tending toward his side of things. This has less to do with site loyalty (although Nich is a sharp guy offline, so his opinion holds a good bit of weight in my eyes) and more to do with the decisions that I make as an informed gamer, same as the rest of you.

I saw the info coming in about 9 months ago, and thought, "hey, that could be cool." But I also tracked the Japanese reviews as they came in, and started to have doubts when the ratings weren't strong. And then the American reviews started to come in, and I pretty much gave up all hope of it being a game I'd like - I have not seen one serious website or magazine give the game better than a mediocre rating. This opinion is bolstered by the feedback I'm getting from non-GIA people playing the game right now.

I think the key thing to remember is that a good review consists of two things - the basic facts about the work in question, and the reviewer's spin on those facts. I haven't seen anyone, even hard core supporters of the game, seriously contest Nich's basic analysis. What I have seen is people react differently to those bare facts. The writer above seems to love "old school" plots, like the one in FFII. If so, more power to him. I genuinely hope he has fun. However, while I love FFII, I'm gonna have to go with Nich in calling that plot somewhat outdated. I love battle systems that require more than a single button push from the user, most of the time, but in this case the timing system seems ill-designed, which could be even worse than plain vanilla menu combat. And while good graphics are always welcome, I'm not gonna buy a game just for the graphics. At this point, I'll simply note that the renders look great in the advertisements and move on.

Closing Comments:

Got through a bit more of Mana, but it's a different game than I'm used to. I've only played a few hours so far, and have yet to see anything that might be called an overall plot. What you're left with is a set of unique, relatively disconnected subquests, which is perfect for people like me who just have time to mess around with a game for an hour or so a night and see the pretty colors. On the other hand, since I don't have a reason to keep playing and see what's going to happen next, there's not much reason to pick it up that often. I guess this must be how non-addicts see video games.

Not that everyone else who reads this column hasn't already figured this out, I just wanted to have my say.

For tomorrow, let's see if you've got any feedback on that DQ article. Later.

-Chris Jones, the player to be named later