A.K.,

I am a long time gamer who has been enjoying rpgs since Phantasy Star. Like many, I accepted the somewhat simplistic graphics (well, simpler than Gradius or Super Contra) of the genre because I knew that given the limitations of the cartridge format, better graphics would neccesitate shorter games. However, now that CDs (and soon, DVDs and GD-ROMs) are the dominant format, and the cost-benefit tradeoff has been rendered moot, I am happy to leave simplistic graphics behind.

I think Square is to be commended for making the bold decision to shrink the yawning chasm between concept art and in-game art in rpgs. Furthermore, Final Fantasy 8 is not only the most beautiful of the FFs, but also the most complex, so it is impossible to argue that one comes at the expense of the other, or that Square has abandoned its roots to pursue the mass market. Therefore, I see nothing commendable in Enix's decision to burden DQ with shabby looking graphics. While early DQs were enjoyable (although IMHO anyone who considered them better than top-notch modern rpgs like the FF series, Suikoden or Xenogears is suffering from an acute case of nostalgia) the decision to stick with primitive (or old school, if you prefer) graphics reeks of complacency. If Enix were publishing a game less guaranteed to make massive profits, I could understand their reluctance to spend too much money on it. But given that DQ7 is a relatively traditional game which like FF, is going to make a profit several times over, Enix is being either lazy or cheap. That being said, as an rpg fanatic, I am willing to purchase DQ7 if the non-graphics portion of the game is up to snuff.. However, I will not look down on casual gamers for not purchasing DQ7. All things being equal, the average person will buy a game which is strong in all areas, as opposed to one which is merely strong in some areas. If some so-called hardcore gamers insist on clinging to the fiction that there is a negative relationship between gameplay and graphics, that is their problem. The rest of us will welcome the improvements made possible by new technologies rather than mourn them.

- Mark

In response to Rayeth's letter from yesterday, I'd like to say that the so-called "general population" are not mindless sheep. They are no more or less intelligent than you or I, they just don't happen to be into games as much as we are. They care about more than "eye candy"; a game being fun is important to them, too. The reason the general population buys games that have been advertised on television is not because they have been brainwashed by the companies to believe their game is cool, it's because they've heard of the game. While gamers have the benefit of reading magazines and websites that tell us about games and how good they are, the only place the average person hears of a game is on television ads. If you had never heard of a movie, would you go to see it? No, because you wouldn't know it even existed. So how is the average person supposed to buy a game that isn't advertised? And while, yes, graphics probably did lead many people to buy FFVII, it isn't what kept them playing. The fun gameplay did that. The reason FFVIII sold well afterwards is because it was advertised, but also because people remebered how much they liked FFVII. Finally, even if you do think the general population is mindless sheep, you shouldn't be complaining. They are the ones responsible for RPG's becoming successful, and if it weren't for them, Dragon Quest VII wouldn't even be coming out in the states.

And AK? The only thing scarier than you doing the weekday column is the fact that you actually went a weekend without having a guest host.

-BadMonkey

Having played (though admittedly not to completion) all 8 Final Fantasies and Tactics, I'm glad Square has decided, to some degree, to return to its "roots." I was madly in love with FF7 when it came out, and would put it down only to play FFT. Then I went back to FF1-6, and enjoyed most of them to some degree or another. So I was first in line at my local EB when FF8 hit the shelves, and I ran home like the little kid I am, now even at 20, and threw the thing in my PSX. I had already seen every Guardian Force, Character Intro, and Limit Break movie on the net, but I was still stunned by the game. Until I learned to Junction. And draw magic. And found out that the characters were all the same. And that I didn't have the drive to upgrade my weapons. And that the story was mostly non-sensical. And that the game should have ended halfway through the third disc. And that playing through Ultemecia's castle was a tedious as playing Eggs of Steel. And so it goes, my game is saved at the door to Ultemecia's chamber, Item command still locked 'cause I didn't find what's his name in the clock tower, character's levels in the low 40's, clock at 43 hours, pissed because Ultemecia is WAY harder than the rest of those lame bosses, and I still haven't seen the ending. Which is why, after FF9, I think Square should close the FF book for good, unless someone wakes up and makes a FFT2. I say, new console, new series. I have thoroughly enjoyed Square's *other* games, even moreso than anything with Final Fantasy and a number in the title. Chrono Trigger, Secret of Mana, Xenogears, Vagrant Story, Brave Fencer, even Einhander and Bushido Blade. And I giggle every time Chrono Cross is mentioned. I know it won't happen, but I say can FF10 and 11 (or change the names), release another Tactics (by the same team!!), and concentrate on The Bouncer, another Vagrant Story maybe, or even a new series. All good things come to an end, and how many good movies, games, ANYthing have a "10" in the title?

Peace -

Pikafoo

TSR has the name Dragon Quest copyrighted here in the states. It's some sort of expansion pack to AD&D, so Enix renamed to Dragon Warrior, since well, it fit's.

- Ojuice

Are you kidding? DQ7 will sell way more than FF9 in Japan. It has twice the popularity there and has been every Japanese mags' most anticipated game.

-XenoFreak

I had a random thought yesterday while building one of my Gundam models. I asked myself, "self, would it not be cool if FFXI had every world from every final fantasy in nice PS2 graphics, and you could buy spaceships and travel to all of them and buy differnent things at different places and the like?"

It would be hard to pull off, but knowing square, they could do it.

-Scott

P.S. I told one of my friends about it, and he thought it was stupid and impossible. Which leads me to the question: "Am I the only one that thinks that would be forkin' awesome?"

AK,

I agree with John Mora, and besides what's so bad about interactive movies? I personally think a movie where you can control the action would be a great game. Who hasn't dreamed of directing a John Woo movie? Just imagine an RPG that looks like the opening to FFVII (which is the best opening CG ever), and plays like FFVI. The best of both worlds, mmmmm.

Rayeth,
still betting that FFIX will sell better than DQVII in the states

What bugs me about these 'old-school' vs 'new-school' arguments is that the participants keep rambling on about sophistication, innovation, and presentation, when it's all rattle-trap bunk. Who cares how long game 'X' is, or how much there is to unlock? If it isn't fun, it's worthless. Who cares if game 'Y' introduced a ground-breaking battle system? I'm more interested in which one refined it to perfection. Who cares if game 'Z' has orgasmic videos and cutscenes? ...Actually, Legend of Dragoon pretty much shatters that argument for me.

Everyone defending their game of choice behind smokescreens like innovation or presentation are only kidding themselves. If games weren't fun, they'd all be crap, lengthy or not, ingenious or not, and sexy or not.

SonicPanda, off to play Wild Arms 2, Megaman 3, and Streets of Rage...