Squeenix Best Final Fantasy

[Butter]

Not played Super Mario RPG. Probably wont ever unless it happens to have really, REALLY great gameplay. Because the setting/themes/art etc are rudimentary and dont lend themselves well to an RPG at all. Mario is supposed to be all about the gameplay. Perhaps Mario RPG is heavily gameplayfag? Does it incorporate platforming? All I know about it is the combat is dead-simple, which isn't promising.

Like Chrono Trigger, it's a game made for small children and doesn't have terribly interesting or challenging gameplay. I've never come close to finishing it. I like its aesthetics, but you can get the full dose of that by listening to the OST and looking at screenshots.

 

[Damned Registrations]

Like Chrono Trigger, it's a game made for small children and doesn't have terribly interesting or challenging gameplay. I've never come close to finishing it. I like its aesthetics, but you can get the full dose of that by listening to the OST and looking at screenshots.

Right on the first count but wrong on the second. Part of the charm of a good RPG is interacting with the environment, characters, and so forth. SMRPG had a lot of charming interactions in this regard; people reacting to you jumping on top of them or their property, silly minigames that were actually entertaining in their own right, dozens of little secrets and a few big ones, including an optional boss fight that is still, unfortunately, very easy. The game did indeed make use of it's 3D space much better than vagrant story, with platforming and dodging around enemies in a way that was actually fun and challenging in places, instead of merely tedious and trivial as it tends to be in most games that ape the system.

Screenshots and an OST will give you the surface aesthetics, but not the feeling you get when you act like a dick and make your people angry or find a cleverly hidden invisible chest or ace a minigame. It doesn't make my list as a top 10 RPG due to the lack of challenge and combat mechanics for an adult, but it's an excellent game for it's niche I'd recommend to someone who's never played an RPG or many video games in general before.

There's some difficulty hacks floating around for it for sure, but I'm not sure if I'd recommend them. The game involves a more complete and complicated version of the timed button presses used in Squall's limit breaks in it's combat, and a difficulty hack probably expects you to be an expert at that aspect. Losing fights or having them take 5 times longer because you can't hit 3 frame timing windows doesn't sound like fun to me.

 

[Lucumo]

As much as I've always derided Final Fantasy VII for being the first ugly entry in the FF series, it certainly impressed millions at the time, due to the 3D-created FMV cutscenes, the pre-rendered 2D images of 3D models used for backgrounds in exploration mode, and the fully-3D graphics of the battle mode.

 

[Ash]

Yeah, FF7 is an absolute beauty the majority of the time. People be outta their damn mind. There was nothing like it in 1997 and it still looks amazing to this day. Battle gfx are nothing special but again that's the case for all JRPG. Character models are of course the complete opposite but you just toggle the button in your head that says it is a problem, because it isn't really. Not enough to hinder enjoyment of the game anyway.

 

[mediocrepoet]

Not played Super Mario RPG. Probably wont ever unless it happens to have really, REALLY great gameplay. Because the setting/themes/art etc are rudimentary and dont lend themselves well to an RPG at all. Mario is supposed to be all about the gameplay. Perhaps Mario RPG is heavily gameplayfag? Does it incorporate platforming? All I know about it is the combat is dead-simple, which isn't promising.

Like Chrono Trigger, it's a game made for small children and doesn't have terribly interesting or challenging gameplay. I've never come close to finishing it. I like its aesthetics, but you can get the full dose of that by listening to the OST and looking at screenshots.

Although I loved it, I was a young adult at the time, and felt it was aimed at a younger audience even then, so this is probably legit. I won't deny that nostalgia and curiosity about whether my view has changed is a big part of why I want to replay it now.

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

Yeah, FF7 is an absolute beauty the majority of the time. People be outta their damn mind. There was nothing like it in 1997 and it still looks amazing to this day. Battle gfx are nothing special but again that's the case for all JRPG. Character models are of course the complete opposite but you just toggle the button in your head that says it is a problem, because it isn't really. Not enough to hinder enjoyment of the game anyway.

I'm loath to compliment Final Fantasy VIII on anything, but Squaresoft's graphics improved tremendously in just two years, even on the same console. Granted, FF VII's graphical quality varied tremendously; the worst were for the character models, which were hideous even in their higher-polygon FMV versions, much less the lower-polygon battle or "chibi" versions. Many of FF VII's FMV cutscenes were impressive, as were some of the pre-rendered backgrounds in exploration.

 

[Ash]

There's no denying. FF8 is graphical incline, at least in terms of consistency, but you lose some cool setting factor, get teenage melodramatics and other faggotry, awful game balance...
...and yet is simultaneously full of charm, quality and a lot to praise (e.g the music! triple triad! complex systems!). Still far better, more intelligent and soulful than Bioware drek! The worst of the best FF and the romhack is a must-have, but then it does become a pretty consistently good game, though still not without flaw.

I really don't mind FF7's inconsistent graphical quality. It's mostly all fantastic or acceptable is partly why, and graphics in the 90s were often either shit or inconsistent as standard. Take FF6: pretty good backgrounds, really good enemies (w/ no animation), and inconsistent character sprites by comparison:

But who cares, right? The majority of it looks good and the character animations offer lots of charm (during story scenes anyway). We are not such graphical whores so as to demand perfection. That's how you end up with decline. I respect a storyfaggot more than an absolute graphics whore

Here's my ranking:

7 > 9 > 5 >= 6 >= 8.

The other games are not in the same league and barely worth talking about more than we already have.

Yes, 6 on par with 8. Modded changes things somewhat. 8's systems are really fun and it doesn't take many hours to become acceptable/interesting as a game like 6. Also I am a sucker for the love story. Romance with meaning, instead of garbage Bioware simulated romance which is the pinnacle of pathetic. Literally no point in it unless I guess you have never had a girlfriend IRL. Without mods, 6 is probably better though. 8 is just too broken.
Ranking them is tough as I value them all deeply. 5 and 6 is exceptionally tough as one is gameplayfag brilliance and the only game that doesn't demand a hack to be , the other story and artistry brilliance though still no gameplay dud overall, notably mid-late game. It SHOULD probably beat 5 when factoring everything but I gotta be a gameplayfaggot and override emotion. Emotion we all feel in regards to the brilliance of 6.

But then how does 9 beat both? 7 shouldn't need justifying but 9? The combat is slow as shit and the systems are OK but they're no job system, or even junction system. The major flaws end there though. Story, art and music are , among the best of the entire series in all three categories. Gameplay is no slouch overall either. Writing the game off is peak decline-enabling. It's an utter privilege to be alive in just the right time to have played these games, and further lucky there are some smart dudes out there to reverse engineer them to fix the difficulty issues too, making them truly prestigious games, because I am not smart enough for that.

I'll explain myself regarding 7 as #1 at a later date perhaps.

 

[Grampy_Bone]

You're just wrong about it. It is Square's swan song. It has flaws, one fairly big one (battle speed, which FFT also suffers from), but they don't take away from its overall status alongside the series' greats.
The game is pure soulful interactive art.

It was actually a spin-off promoted to main series title developed alongside FF10 and 11, mostly done by contractors from Hawaii who had never made a game before.

Xenogears shouldn't be lumped in with FF. It's yet another storyfag snoozefest fake RPG.

At least the combat is turn-based. Riddle me this Codex, without knowing anything about these two games, based on these characters, which would you rather play?

Anyway, I just loaded my original PSX copy of FF9 and fell asleep during the intro. Then my kids told me they were "sick of Final Fantasy and Adol adventures."

 

[Grampy_Bone]

I respect a storyfaggot more than an absolute graphics whore

This is some hypocrisy that always bugs me around here. When someone likes a game with bad graphics, they will always try to exempt the visuals from criticism. But when they dislike a game, they'll usually find a way to ding the graphics.

I guess when you're in love with a hog, you just can't see it right? Love is love. Personally, I am not ashamed to admit I am a graphics whore. Doesn't matter how great a girl's personality is, if it doesn't go up it doesn't go in. Beauty is truth, truth beauty.

 

[Ash]

I like graphics too. But a graphics whore, at its most extreme, is someone that doesn't play old games because of graphics, and in general prioritizes graphics above things that truly matter.

The good news is, FF9 had among the best graphics at its time, so you should be good. But I feel you may be referring to art direction in particular, not technical graphics whorism. Art direction is definitely a valid reason to be upset with a game. I try my best to not allow it to factor, but typical anime games for example often turn me away. Typical anime is not very detailed. Some, but it's rare. I want them to be detailed. And playing as little girls, that make little girl anime grunts every button press, that look all simple yet have massive boobs and eyes...offputting. Yet if it were a game as ambitious, large scale, genius, otherwise beautiful and highly detailed (backgrounds/FMVs) etc etc as a classic 90s FF, I would put up with it.

Yes, FF9 has some whimsical-looking characters, but honestly every FF game has. Moogles, chocobos, weird and wonderful monsters like cactuar. All of them.
FFX character designs is the only game where it actually bothers me but there it is a fairly decent game underneath, hasn't stopped me from my 3 playthroughs, though I doubt I will replay it again at this point (mainly because of the gameplay decline, but the art is a factor too).
I'm not telling you it doesn't truly matter (well, I may have done), I'm telling you to turn off the mental switch or otherwise appreciate despite the warts. Like I do with 10, which despite not being a great game I still like. Start over the game with a clean mental slate and the romhack.

Warning: offensive FFX character design inside

Spoiler

 

[Ash]

FF9 is not all Hippaul just as FFX is not all Seymour. Small sample of cool FF9 character designs:

Spoiler

Beautiful pre-renders in which every character looks awesome (this one showing Atomos in dark gritty glory), how can you not appreciate?

There are a lot of cool boss designs.

The nobles and the poors of Treno are pretty cool.

It was actually a spin-off promoted to main series title developed alongside FF10 and 11, mostly done by contractors from Hawaii who had never made a game before.

From what I recall, it started that way, for a brief period, and then when promoted the core FF bros moved to Hawaii and worked alongside the contractors to make it the real deal.

 

[Damned Registrations]

I make a distinction between art style and graphics quality. The first is important, while the latter is not. Take that last FF9 screenshot for example. The guard or whatever in the foreground; I hate him, with a burning passion. I'd take the noseless blocky map versions of FF7 characters over him anyways.

Yeah he also looks weird and distorted, but at least they're trying to have vaguely human proporptions overall, and the head is large to show facial experessions better on a blurry as TV from the 90's.

That guy in Treno reminds me of Lord Helmet.

I'll grant you Atomos looked rad, it was a great reimagining of an awesome concept from FF5. But overall the art direction has a lot more people that look like funko-pops than cool monsters.

Monster design in generally took a huge nosedive after FF6 honestly. Like, I get why, it's hard to model humans. But so many of the enemies from FF7 and onwards are just kind of random animal parts stapled together.

Aside from the behemoth, all of these enemies are easily recognizable; you can tell at a glance what kind of creature it is and why it might be a threat.

What the fuck are these things? Why are they here? What do they do all day? These designs are decline.


They're not all bad, you've got stuff like this too, which are just some animals. But the series drifted away from simple enemies like a bigass scary bird and more into bodypart salad. Characters got more eccentric too. You couldn't just be a mage, you had to have some weird belt fetish and use puppets as weapons. FF6 has some weird ass characters too but it gets a pass because it has a roster of like 16 people, and even then most of them are fairly normal.

More angry wild animals, fewer eldritch horrors surrounding every idyllic village, thanks.

 

[Ash]

6 probably does have the best enemy designs in the series. Shame they're all static images with no animation though!

As for Shinra Officer model vs Treno Guard...they're identically bad for me, if not the FF7 one worse for lesser detail. But the thing is they take up like 5% of screen real estate. It's easy to ignore when you have text boxes you should be reading and pretty backgrounds you should be admiring. While jamming to the tunes and planning your next materia combination tweak. They do nothing to bring the game down in either case, for me.
It's also easy to ignore when most of the time they're getting made fun of by the game, or providing comic relief in some form.

It's funny you bring up FunCo Pops, as I HATE them. Largely because they lack detail, but the oversized head bothers me too. But I never notice it in 9. Why? Because it hardly exists. few characters even have anything absurdly disproportionate. Zidane & Garnet have slightly disproportionate heads, which their hair also does well to hide. Vivi doesn't have a head. Freya's is either in proportion or hidden by her hat. Amarant's is hidden by his hair. Steiner his armor hides proportions. And so on. Most town NPCs and such are fine - beast-like hybrids so don't exactly need human proportions, at worst you get ever so slightly off proportions on humans. It's not FunCo AT ALL. That's World of Final Fantasy and it is gross.

Even RPG Codex has better art direction.

Now returning to 9:

Spoiler

There is only one noticeably oversized head in this image and it is Zidane's slightly oversized noggin, partially obscured by hair. Stop blowing it out of proportion
There's the little blue and white guy in the middle, but that's not an overized head, but a chef's hat.
Also the background looks bad for some reason. Ignore that it looks to be butchered by an emulator post-processing shader.

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

Aside from the behemoth, all of these enemies are easily recognizable; you can tell at a glance what kind of creature it is and why it might be a threat.

Squaresoft's version of a behemoth should be recognizable to any veteran of the Final Fantasy series, though.

 

[Rincewind]

I played Final Fantasy VIII until the end of the first CD on the PC back in 2001(ish), that's it, then the uni started so I had better things to do. Actually, I liked the story a lot, I guess it was just that period when I wasn't much into games, so I never picked it up again to finish it... But it had a certain charm yeah, although probably I was a bit too old for it already in my early 20s. Nice music too. That's all my experience with the series.

Can someone give me a TL;DR version of which entries are worth playing? Apart from FF VIII, I also played Knights of Xentar, probably about the first 50%, and that sums up all my experience with jRPGs. Never played a console game in my life.

 

[mediocrepoet]

I played Final Fantasy VIII until the end of the first CD on the PC back in 2001(ish), that's it, then the uni started so I had better things to do. Actually, I liked the story a lot, I guess it was just that period when I wasn't much into games, so I never picked it up again to finish it... But it had a certain charm yeah, although probably I was a bit too old for it already in my early 20s. Nice music too. That's all my experience with the series.

Can someone give me a TL;DR version of which entries are worth playing? Apart from FF VIII, I also played Knights of Xentar, probably about the first 50%, and that sums up all my experience with jRPGs. Never played a console game in my life.

1 - 6 can be found on PC and consoles as the pixel remasters and early on still show some of their Wizardry inspired roots. This grows less as time goes on though and after 6, the games begin to become extremely cinematic and story driven. After IX, you start looking at games that stop resembling classic Final Fantasies altogether and even games that are arguably not very RPGish and lose the exploration and such that made the games interesting.

Arguably, the games become pretty cinematic and story driven from about IV on, but imo there's something to like about everything between 1-6 (caveat, I haven't spent much time with 2 and it had a weird system, IIRC).

 

[Rincewind]

I played Final Fantasy VIII until the end of the first CD on the PC back in 2001(ish), that's it, then the uni started so I had better things to do. Actually, I liked the story a lot, I guess it was just that period when I wasn't much into games, so I never picked it up again to finish it... But it had a certain charm yeah, although probably I was a bit too old for it already in my early 20s. Nice music too. That's all my experience with the series.

Can someone give me a TL;DR version of which entries are worth playing? Apart from FF VIII, I also played Knights of Xentar, probably about the first 50%, and that sums up all my experience with jRPGs. Never played a console game in my life.

1 - 6 can be found on PC and consoles as the pixel remasters and early on still show some of their Wizardry inspired roots. This grows less as time goes on though and after 6, the games begin to become extremely cinematic and story driven. After IX, you start looking at games that stop resembling classic Final Fantasies altogether and even games that are arguably not very RPGish and lose the exploration and such that made the games interesting.

Arguably, the games become pretty cinematic and story driven from about IV on, but imo there's something to like about everything between 1-6 (caveat, I haven't spent much time with 2 and it had a weird system, IIRC).

Is it fair to say then that 1 to 8 are worth playing in order if someone's curious about jRPGs? Are the PC versions preferable to the console originals? Actually, probably I'd prefer some PS1 emulator so I can use shaders I'm guessing the PlayStation versions are preferable? I don't know much about consoles...

EDIT: Oh, the Pixel Remasters have built-in CRT shaders, that's a nice touch! I read a quick rundown about them; they seem like a "modernised retro" experience. and judging by the video it's tastefully done (e.g., the menu screens are sharp but the game world uses the CRT shaders). I'm an OriginalExperience(tm) guy, but I guess these are just superior to the originals, am I right?

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

Can someone give me a TL;DR version of which entries are worth playing? Apart from FF VIII, I also played Knights of Xentar, probably about the first 50%, and that sums up all my experience with jRPGs. Never played a console game in my life.

The original Final Fantasy for the Famicom/NES is not in the JRPG subgenre but rather a game derived from Wizardry, Ultima, and directly from Dungeons & Dragons, without much of a narrative and without characterization. It is worth playing for someone interested in the roots of the series and is pretty decent in its own right.

Final Fantasy IV (originally released outside Japan as Final Fantasy II) on the Super Famicom/NES is very much in the JRPG subgenre, with a lengthy narrative centering around the protagonist, along with various other characters who move into and out of the party, beyond the player's control, amidst a multitude of cutscenes, while combat and exploration are simplistic. It also introduced the "Active Time Battle" system that would continue in the next five games in the series. Worth playing.

Final Fantasy VI (originally released outside Japan as Final Fantasy III) expanded the length to about 40 hours, which would be standard for the next five games in the series, and otherwise continued in the JRPG tradition but now in a steampunk setting and with an ensemble cast. Also has the best music of any series entry and probably of any videogame ever made (series composer Nobuo Uematsu outdid himself here), despite the technical limitations of the Super Famicom/NES. Definitely worth playing.

Final Fantasy VII was a bit of a cultural phenomenon in its day, but the leap to the Sony Playstation and 3D graphics was awkward. Has a nukepunk setting, and starting with this game every entry in the series has many FMV cutscenes in addition to regular cutscenes. If you enjoyed Final Fantasy VIII, you'll probably enjoy this one, if the graphics don't bother you too much.

Final Fantasy VIII tremendously improved the graphical quality over its immediate predecessor, despite being released just two years later and still on the Sony Playstation. Has an irritating cast of teenagers, level scaling, and a semi-futuristic setting that doesn't really cohere. Wouldn't recommend except that you stated you enjoyed it previously.

Final Fantasy IX harked back to the Famicom/NES and Super Famicom/NES games in many ways, while adopting a cartoonish aesthetic relative to the realistic graphics of its immediate predecessor. Has better themes, plot, characters, and gameplay than the other two Playstation Final Fantasies, with a vaguely Baroque 17th-century setting. Worth playing.

Final Fantasy X made the jump to being fully 3D on the Playstation 2, with a post-post-apocalyptic setting and voice-acting (not full voice-acting, but fully in cutscenes). Combat reverted to turn-based, while greater linearity meant exploration was reduced from its already-limited amount. This is the last Final Fantasy with new music by Nobuo, but he only contributed a portion of the soundtrack, so the overall quality is much lower. Looks gorgeous, but I wouldn't recommend except that you enjoyed Final Fantasy VIII.

Final Fantasy XI is an MMORPG, as is its successor Final Fantasy XIV; these two shouldn't have been numbered entries in the series.

Final Fantasy XII is 50% longer than it should be, while having horrific MMORPG-influenced combat in which the player mostly just sits and watches the characters act according to a simple set of if-then statements that the player has inputted. Avoid.

Final Fantasy XIII on the Playstation 3 butchered combat in a different way from its immediate predecessor, while also nixing exploration in favor of running down an endless tunnel/corridor (there aren't even any cities/towns/settlements). The tutorials last over half the game; it isn't until after the midpoint that the combat options are fully unlocked. Also, the characters are the worst of any game in the series. The worst RPG I've ever finished.

Final Fantasy XV was stuck in development hell for a number of years before releasing on the Playstation 4, and the result is an awkward mix of Open World with a sort of Action RPG combat probably influenced by Dragon's Dogma. Notable also for having bizarre tonal dissonance, established quite early in the game, between a road trip for the four party members (all established friends) and a grim tale about the destruction of the protagonist's kingdom and possibly the entire world. Nothing about the game is much good, though it's still better than XII or XIII. Avoid.

There's also II, III, V, XVI, and the many, many offshoots, sequels, or otherwise random games with the Final Fantasy name attached.

 

[mediocrepoet]

Is it fair to say then that 1 to 8 are worth playing in order if someone's curious about jRPGs? Are the PC versions preferable to the console originals? Actually, probably I'd prefer some PS1 emulator so I can use shaders I'm guessing the PlayStation versions are preferable? I don't know much about consoles...

EDIT: Oh, the Pixel Remasters have built-in CRT shaders, that's a nice touch! I read a quick rundown about them; they seem like a "modernised retro" experience. and judging by the video it's tastefully done (e.g., the menu screens are sharp but the game world uses the CRT shaders). I'm an OriginalExperience(tm) guy, but I guess these are just superior to the originals, am I right?

I'm not really a JRPG guy, but if you're interested in classic JRPGs, FF 1-6 and some of the early Dragon Warriors would be a good starting point. Maybe Suikoden 2 (PSX) and Lufia 2 (SNES).

Anyway, for Final Fantasy 1-3 are from the 8 bit NES, 4-6 are from the SNES. As Mr. Z says, 1, 4, and 6, were the only ones originally released in the west (as FF 1, 2, and 3).

Final Fantasy 7-9 are PSX games, X, X-2, and XII are PS2 games, XIII, XIII-2, and Lightning Returns are PS3 games, and XV is a PS4 game, XVI is a PS5 game game. Note that some of these also game out on XBox platforms and later the Switch.

Generally, the pixel remasters have some good features but are thought to be significantly easier. Given how much Squenix shits the bed with remasters, if you've got original ROMs or carts available, you should definitely lean towards the original experiences. I pointed out the Pixel Remasters more for the ease of finding them these days since they're current.

Also, Final Fantasy Tactics (PSX) is the best Final Fantasy title there is. But it's a tactics JRPG as the name implies rather than a classic JRPG experience.

 

[mediocrepoet]

Oh and in case you were wondering, XI and XIV are missing from the FF titles above because they're MMOs that were also somehow mainline titles. Because Squenix.

 

[Rincewind]

Much appreciated Zed Duke of Banville & mediocrepoet, that was super informative.

Yeah, actually I'm certain I'll go with the NES / SNES / PSX originals as I'm not just interested in the games but also in a bit of technological history. So the "best" for me is how the games were experienced at the time of release—I want to experience the same thing. And I definitely don't need "easy mode"

I assume nothing of great value is lost by not playing those entries that only received an English release much later. The 7 games I would probably enjoy are more than enough for now.

 

[mediocrepoet]

Much appreciated Zed Duke of Banville & mediocrepoet, that was super informative.

Yeah, actually I'm certain I'll go with the NES / SNES / PSX originals as I'm not just interested in the games but also in a bit of technological history. So the "best" for me is how the games were experienced at the time of release—I want to experience the same thing. And I definitely don't need "easy mode"

I assume nothing of great value is lost by not playing those entries that only received an English release much later. The 7 games I would probably enjoy are more than enough for now.

Possible exception for Final Fantasy V, but otherwise, yeah, not really. Should be good to go.

 

[Damned Registrations]

I assume nothing of great value is lost by not playing those entries that only received an English release much later.

I actually consider FF5 to be the best in the series, it's got a really cool job system (And don't play the PSX version, it was a terrible port). There are also other JRPGs I'd recommend first over the FF series (SaGa games, Lufia 2, SMT 3 or BoF 3) but if you're after some historical perspective, FF was certainly a big player. Chrono Trigger and Dragon Quest as well. Dragon Quest is particularly interesting with how it shifted gears from being an open world adventure to an on-rails experience over time, and it made very significant gameplay changes, not even having a party in the first game, then moving to having a party and eventually a job system. It's another one where some of the better entries didn't get english releases, at least until much later when they were done poorly as ports to later systems.

The earlier NES games in particular tend to be a lot shorter as they don't involve nearly as much dialogue. Might want to pick and choose from games made later, as they'll be significant time commitments, often not even giving the player access to all the mechanics the combat is designed around until 8+ hours into the game.

Last thing I'd suggest is trying to find scans of manuals for the older games. You really were meant to RTFM back in the NES/SNES era of gaming. PSX games and onwards started doing a lot more tutorials, but early games often had very important information only listed in the manual, like what items did or special features of characters, classes or equipment that would be difficult to notice on your own. Bonus points if the scan of the manual is grainy and in black and white, because a lot of the ones I used as a kid were 12th generation cheap photocopies from a rental store.

 

[Rincewind]

I assume nothing of great value is lost by not playing those entries that only received an English release much later.

I actually consider FF5 to be the best in the series, it's got a really cool job system (And don't play the PSX version, it was a terrible port). There are also other JRPGs I'd recommend first over the FF series (SaGa games, Lufia 2, SMT 3 or BoF 3) but if you're after some historical perspective, FF was certainly a big player. Chrono Trigger and Dragon Quest as well. Dragon Quest is particularly interesting with how it shifted gears from being an open world adventure to an on-rails experience over time, and it made very significant gameplay changes, not even having a party in the first game, then moving to having a party and eventually a job system. It's another one where some of the better entries didn't get english releases, at least until much later when they were done poorly as ports to later systems.

Thanks for these recommendations. Yes, I'm interested in experiencing trends in gaming, so I'll look into Chrono Trigger, Dragon Quest, and Dragon Warriors then.

Last thing I'd suggest is trying to find scans of manuals for the older games. You really were meant to RTFM back in the NES/SNES era of gaming. PSX games and onwards started doing a lot more tutorials, but early games often had very important information only listed in the manual, like what items did or special features of characters, classes or equipment that would be difficult to notice on your own.

Oh yeah, I'm heavily into games from the 80s and in most of the more complex RPGs and strategy games you don't have much hope without reading the manual first.

Bonus points if the scan of the manual is grainy and in black and white, because a lot of the ones I used as a kid were 12th generation cheap photocopies from a rental store.

 

[mediocrepoet]

I assume nothing of great value is lost by not playing those entries that only received an English release much later.

I actually consider FF5 to be the best in the series, it's got a really cool job system (And don't play the PSX version, it was a terrible port). There are also other JRPGs I'd recommend first over the FF series (SaGa games, Lufia 2, SMT 3 or BoF 3) but if you're after some historical perspective, FF was certainly a big player. Chrono Trigger and Dragon Quest as well. Dragon Quest is particularly interesting with how it shifted gears from being an open world adventure to an on-rails experience over time, and it made very significant gameplay changes, not even having a party in the first game, then moving to having a party and eventually a job system. It's another one where some of the better entries didn't get english releases, at least until much later when they were done poorly as ports to later systems.

Thanks for these recommendations. Yes, I'm interested in experiencing trends in gaming, so I'll look into Chrono Trigger, Dragon Quest, and Dragon Warriors then.

Last thing I'd suggest is trying to find scans of manuals for the older games. You really were meant to RTFM back in the NES/SNES era of gaming. PSX games and onwards started doing a lot more tutorials, but early games often had very important information only listed in the manual, like what items did or special features of characters, classes or equipment that would be difficult to notice on your own.

Oh yeah, I'm heavily into games from the 80s and in most of the more complex RPGs and strategy games you don't have much hope without reading the manual first.

Bonus points if the scan of the manual is grainy and in black and white, because a lot of the ones I used as a kid were 12th generation cheap photocopies from a rental store.

And if you get there, try Front Mission 3 on the PSX. Not sure it started a trend or anything, but it's awesome.