Talk:Final Fantasy VII

Archives Archive 1 (July 2004 — June 2005) Archive 2 (July 2005 — January 2006) Archive 3 (February 2006 — August 2006) Archive 4 (August 2006 — January 2007) Archive 5 (January 2007 — )

Wait Just One Second

In Final Fantasy 7, Cloud THROWS Sephiroth into the Mako Pit, he does not merely FALL in. While impaled, Cloud pulls the sword down, lifting Sephiroth up and catapults him over the edge! This is ENTIRELY different than in the Anime where the whole thing is skewed. Cloud undeniabley defeats Sephiroth as a footsoldier in the actual game! This is VERY important.

Great Work!!!

Congrats for the ppl who made possible that one of my fav games appear in the main page. Great Work!!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alextrevelian 006 (talk • contribs) 01:11, 20 March 2007 (UTC).

Look at all the reverts! Shouldn't the page be protected? Matrixhax0r 01:38, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

What the deuce? I havent notice that, why in earth it isnt protected since is a featured article?. Anyway, I just requested a cascading protection --ometzit<col> 01:45, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually, featured articles are never protected. Its so anon. IPs can add more info to it (but most of them end up vandalizing the article like here [1] & [2])-- Hdt83 | Talk 01:48, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

We don't want to say "Look, this is a featured article, one of the best in Wikipedia. Unfortunately, you can't edit it." Protection is only for extreme situations. -- ReyBrujo 01:54, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

OMG thats ridiculous I didn´t know that if its a featured article it´s because is great the way it is but if someone want to see today best article and found that only niggers like FFVII or that Aeris die at the end then whats the point? Also it would be horrible finding that Aeris dies at the end, I know that because i once enter to half blood prince article and the page was replaced with a bold Dumbledure is killed at the end by snape. In any case, I didnt know that, another point less to wikipedia--ometzit<col> 02:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Since Aeris' death is out in the open...I want to point out that Aeris does not die in the end, but rather at the end of the first disc. Sumnjim 12:37, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

OMG, Aeris dies! Why did you tell me? It has been only 10 years since the game was released! Now I won't be able to enjoy the game anymore! -- ReyBrujo 02:05, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I can see a little bit of O rly? My brother havent play it nd i always have told he that is one of the best games for PS (Yeah, i still have it, it still works nd I enjoy it). In any case, if thats the policy that the almighty Jimbo imposed what can I do ;)--ometzit<col> 02:16, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Just remember to warn users when you revert, otherwise they will continue vandalizing. -- ReyBrujo 02:26, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Use test3 or blatantvandal. One warning is enough for immature mainpage vandalism. — Deckiller 02:27, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, congratz on the featured article. However, it is not clear from the summary that "Compilations of Final Fantasy VII" incorperates movies, and not just games. The fact that a good game resulted in sequel games is no surprise, but movies are significant. I don't know if this can be fit into the summary, but it should be there. This is probably the wrong place for such a comment, so when someone reads this could you please fix the summary and either move or delete my comment? Thanks (Tdmg 03:52, 20 March 2007 (UTC))

I won't delete your comment (it's bad form), but your suggestion is well taken. I'll try to incorporate it, but you're welcome to be bold and do it yourself too. Axem Titanium 04:30, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Just thought I'd swing by and say congratulations to all of the people who got this to FA status. You guys rock! Kntrabssi 04:35, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not a regular contributor to Wiki, but thank you all who've helped to get this as a featured article. It's a fantastic compilation deserving of the honor. But it gave me a big smile to see it on the main page. Thanks again! 203.129.39.176 19:46, 20 March 2007 (UTC)Joel

I also want to thank everyone for getting this on the main page. I remember when the game first came out. I already had it reserved for 6 months, and I skipped the last 1/2 of my school day to drive 40 miles to the mall to pick it up. At the time, it was the most amazing game ever made (IMO). That game gave me many ups (killing the weapons) and downs (Aeris' death). Absolutely fantastic game. Sumnjim 12:20, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

• Yeah way to go making this great game FA-status!--Richard (Talk - Contribs) 12:57, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

spoilers

oh my god, i just found out Aeris dies...there should be one of those, "spoilers ahead" thingys to warn people because it just gave away a HUGE suprise for me and i'm in the middle of playing it. man, it's all spoiled for me. augh— Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.72.47.41 (talk • contribs)

The Plot and Story headers should have been the first indication that there might be spoilers ahead. --Onorem 12:11, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

The game is nearly 10 years old, I'm sorry, but I'm going to go ahead and say that the statute of limitations for FF7 spoilers has long past. Aeris' death one of the most well-known moments in gaming. The fact that it's unsigned also leads me to believe the guy is just messing around. EdenMaster 12:18, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree with it, people younger that 10 years (my bro, 4ex) who have hear about how great the game is would want to play it some time, and if we screw all the story whats the point? I believe that all plots should have spoilers warning because doesn´t matter how old is the thing, not everybody have 20 years and know about the best moments in gaming--ometzit<col> 14:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC)--ometzit<col> 14:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

The spoiler warnings are the headings "plot", "story", the length of time these pages take to load, and the walls of text. The debate about spoiler warnings has gone on for quite some time; the Final Fantasy WikiProject and a few other isolated edting bases have decided not to follow that aspect of the manual of style — Deckiller 14:10, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it's not right now. I think someone may have taken it out. I'll add it again. 204.118.51.210 14:25, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I'll clarify. I didn't say there were spoiler tags there, I said that those were the spoiler warnings, in essense. — Deckiller 14:51, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree there should be a spoiler tag. Ive seen spoiler tags on lesser spoilers then this. There are no spoiler tags ANYWHERE on this page even tho it gives away a ton of info. There are spoiler tags on the Harry Potter books... even tho just as many people have read those books as have played this game. Just because it says "plot" or "story" doesnt mean it shouldnt have a spoiler tag. The only time when a "plot" or "story" section doesnt need a spoiler tag is when, of course, there are no key spoilers mentioned in the text. Spoiler tags are seriously important and should be included in all instances where key elements are given away, with no special treatment just because something is popular. Kamiawolf 04:57, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

The point isn't popularity. It's not even related to if others have it. The point is this -- spoilers are optional. There is NO policy for them. Therefore, it's up to the editors to decide if they wish to use them or not. The editors to are the mains ones editing the article have decided, as a consensus, to not use them. You don't give ANY arguments outside of "I like them" for why they need to be there. So I ask. WHY are they important? Why should certain info be given a disclaimer, as it were, but we have to avoid all other warnings? What is a "key" spoiler anyway? I'm sure everyone could agree that, say, Aerith dying is "key", but what about, oh, that Cloud falls sick for a portion of the game? Or that Cid's rocket does end up working? Etc...

Seriously, almost every argument for spoilers I've seen has been in the "we need to protect readers from themselves" catagory. It seems like since everyone comes to expect it from most websites, they expect it here. I can sort of see that logic, but that doesn't mean that WP "should" just because others do. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 11:40, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

hey there! while i'm still definately not ready to get back into this pleasant "discussion," by y'alls own admissions you should obviously and unquestionably:

A) allow the removal or tagging of the (at least one) significant spoiler much later in the article, nowhere near the plot section whatsoever.

B) allow the removal or "cut-linking" of the image of Aeris getting it, which is rather large and VERY hard to miss while scrolling past the plot section.

please do so, as i don't want anyone to flip out on me doing it myself. peace. Elgaroo 19:13, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

• "...nowhere near the plot section whatsoever..." As has also been pointed out, it's an encyclopedia. Just because there are spoilers outside of the plot and story sections doesn't warrant spoiler tagging. If there's no spoiler tagging in the most obvious places that "should" according to spoilertag fanboys, why should we tag a mention that's (presumably, since you don't say exactly WHAT it is or where) further down?
• "...removal or "cut-linking" of the image of Aeris..." Why? WP:NOT#CENSOR. We're not here to protect people from themselves. It's been 10 years since the game was released. There's got to be a statute of limitations on this stuff, because 10 years after the release, people should not expect to be coddled, no matter how popular the game still is today. Aeris dies. Stuff happens. Get over it. Nique talk 13:56, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Especially since it's revealed in FFVII's multiple sequels (including a full-length movie) that Aerith is dead. --—ΔαίδαλοςΣΣ 00:37, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Please try to keep an out-universe perspective. A piece of fiction is a piece of fiction before being the sequel or the prequel to other fictions; what I mean is, all of these stuff aren't part of real history, and the internal chronology of the events is irrelevant to Wikipedia's out-universe stance (just because something happens in a sequel doesn't mean the original work has suddenly shifted in the "past"). Aerith being dead in FFVII:AC/BC/CC/DC/and whatnot is not a spoiler, but Aeris dying in FFVII is a spoiler. Kariteh 12:30, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

May I just add my view on this. I can understand the rationale behind not plastering spoiler warnings all over the article. However, I feel that the image of Aeris' death is too much. As has been said above, it's hard to miss it while scrolling through the page. It should be removed. 82.32.210.193 01:20, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Ironically, if you look at Gamespy.com, they have a feature up right now about the "25 best cutscenes", and Aeris's death is right there, no spoilers. It's not too much. The game came out 10 years ago. The statute of limitations has passed. --PresN 04:02, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Another extreme vandalism

The article Final Fantasy VII has been heavily vandalised once again...!!! Can anyone restore this article back? After that restoration, I think maybe we should semi-lock the article to avoid vandalism by annonymous users. Hezery99 13:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree. The bastards have been vandalizing all night. J'onn J'onzz 13:04, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I put the page up for semi-protection. Should get protected soon. --Ashfire908 13:31, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I can´t belive that featured articles aren´t protected the moment they go to the main page--ometzit<col> 14:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

It's today's frontpage article, we can't protect it, and admins will not protect it either. It has to be left unprotected so that anyone who wants to make a constructive edit can. It just happens that frontpage articles tend to get vandalized the most on their day. Nothing we can do but keep reverting and wait til tomorrow. Nique talk 14:03, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I thought that (at least at one point) all featured articles were semi-protected during the day that they are put up precisely because of the potential for heavy vandalism? - Fearless Son 17:53, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

they discussed that earlier... they couldnt do it in time so they just undo everything that happenes...im watching this article as well as them so i guess it helps a little. but no one can get it protectedDark reaper6789 17:57, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

That's a shame, 'cause some people keeps changing the article in an inappropiate way and submitting stupid stuff--DrMauroFrenchman 04:47, 12 May 2007 (UTC).

See Wikipedia:Main Page featured article protection, there's no actual policy/guideline against protecting the main page FA, just vocal opposition to it from various people, and 2-3 years of tradition. --W.marsh 19:55, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Too much plot in the setting section?

It seems like there is too much plot (story) in the setting section. Especially the second half. 66.167.71.151 14:41, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Not really; it's describing the backstory. I would prefer a lot of it moved to an article (along with the crufty location list subarticle, not the two paragraphs in the article, those are fine) called Gaia (Final Fantasy VII) to follow in the footsteps of Spira (Final Fantasy X), but we'll get to that eventually. — Deckiller 14:46, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Spoiler Warning

I don't think I saw a spoiler warning before reading this article. This article does contain many details that viewers might not want to see if they have not played the game —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.118.21.98 (talk) 14:48, 20 March 2007 (UTC).

There have been numerous debates over this in the past, which led to certain WikiProjects, such as the Final Fantasy/Square Enix WikiProjects, not using them. — Deckiller 14:50, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Which projects have banned it besides the FF project, and are you sure the SE one banned it? Kariteh 16:00, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[3]. I don't really see the need to detract time away from editing to look for the other projects that omit them completely or go on a "case by case basis", except the Video Games WikiProject, which implemented a "case by case" guideline for flexibility. I said "do not use them" ("ban" implies a strict ruling), which ties into that "case by case basis". Also, a WikiProject does not necessarily have to be a formal group: it can be as simple as a FA push. This can be seen in articles like Shadow of the Colossus, The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, and so on, which do not use the tags and fall under the CVG guideline stressing "case by case basis". But the horse has already been beaten enough; if a group of editors working on an article do not wish to use the warnings (and vice versa), then that's the example of the case by case basis outlined in the CVG MoS. — Deckiller 16:22, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

One I know of is Wikiproject Opera ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 22:38, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Reception

I remember this game having a poor response when it came out. I remember it getting bad reviews and everybody talking shit about it when it first came out. It seems like it has more of a cult following, but the article suggests that it did extremely well. Can somebody explain this to me? Rzrscm 19:38, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

You remember incorrectly. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 19:41, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I definetly remember correctly. I was reluctant to buy it because of the criticism. Rzrscm 19:44, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

It's obvious that whatever magazine or blog in which you found this criticism was in the extreme minority. Final Fantasy VII does not have a "cult following"; it is an incredibly popular game, as it was upon its release, and its admirers have always outnumbered its detractors. "Cult following" is simply not an applicable term in this case. (Anonymous, March 20 2007, 6:18 PM)

Cult following in descriptive use of FFVII is tantamount to calling Army of Darkness a cult film. Evil Dead is (or perhaps was) a cult film. By the time Army of Darkness came out it had become much more mainstream. How the hell do you think Bruce Cambell is doing Old Spice commercials anyways!? Dj8thick 03:22, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Or, cutting more to the facts than opinions, the vast majority of the reviews at launch were positive, and it was a best-seller. That isn't to say you didn't read or hear of a negative review, but they were not in the majority at the time. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 03:28, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

And the vandalism starts...

This is sorta getting rediculous. Mendinso 20:45, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree. Unfortunately, I'm on wireless, so my vandal fighting is limited. I think first-offense blocks are good in this situation; the first block is the user's warning. — Deckiller 20:46, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

There seems to be a fascination with turning the words backwards..--Cao Wei 21:12, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Main page, whoo!

Congratulations, everyone, Final Fantasy VII has survived being featured on the main page. Axem Titanium 02:32, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank god! That was arguably the hardest main page defense in my year as an admin. — Deckiller 04:44, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not so sure... I don't think this article is referenced very well. You just need a few more — Jack · talk · 13:46, Wednesday, 21 March 2007

Starting a subtext analysis page

I really think we should do this. Final Fantasy VII has intense philosophical, psycholigical subtext. It's why I loved the game anyway.--AquaFox 20:27, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not allow original research and unsourced analysis. Please see the attribution policy and its subpages for more. The Final Fantasy Wikia might allow something like that, however. — Deckiller 20:42, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I like this or it at least should be mentioned inr eception or something because there has been a lot looked into. I know that in A Play Within A Play in Issue 84 of The Escapist e-magazine they take a look at some of the psycological aspects in how they developed the characters and why exactly FF VII was a success Ariolander 06:32, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Clone

So is Cloud a copy of Sephiroth or not. I was never to clear on that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.119.6.234 (talk)

Firstly, please sign your talk page entries, and add them to the bottom of the page instead of the top. Second, Wikipedia talk pages are not a discussion forum, they're for discussing changes to the article. Thirdly, he's not a clone of anyone, though he does believe for a time that Zack's story is, for the most part, his own. Nique talk 00:17, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Compilation

The article Final_Fantasy_VII_Snowboarding states that it is not part of the compilation but the list here still includes it. So what's the real deal? Berserkerz Crit 14:09, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

It says quite clearly that Compilation titles are listed in bold and FFVII Snowboarding is not bolded. Axem Titanium 14:54, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

You shouldn't be using the american Cover

Came out in japan first... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.145.213 (talk • contribs) 17:39, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Wouldnt you only use the japanese cover on the japanese wikipedia? Evaunit666 00:25, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

No the consensus was First release region gets the cover, many japanese games come out in us first and get us cover here.

Plus all us final fantasy title covers are ugly. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.42.145.213 (talk • contribs).

What consensus? Where? Nique talk 11:40, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

• Besides, this is the English Wikipedia. — Deckiller 14:16, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Lack of Spoiler Warnings

Why in the hell are there not spoiler warnings? There's a "plot" section, but that doesn't necessarily mean there will be spoilers, just as the back of a book or a review or a preview gives away the plot but doesn't spoil anything. In fact, the "Setting" section has some very helpful info without spoiling anything, leading a reader to believe he/she can read on without a problem.

Furthermore, if "plot" is a sufficient spoiler warning, then why are spoiler warnings used at all in Wikipedia? Why don't they just have a "plot" section for anything with a story? Simple: because "plot" is not a sufficient spoiler warning.

Even further, there's a BLATANT PICTURE of Sephiroth killing Aeris, with a caption that says Sephiroth kills Aeris. WTF?! This is ****ing ridiculous. I decided to be safe and scroll on past everything else after reading the "setting" section, but I couldn't miss that picture, and now that significant part of the story is ruined for me.

I don't give a crap how old this game is, it will always be new to somebody. I'm 23 and it's new to me. I heard a lot about this game, but never played it and never knew anything about it other than 2 character names and the fact that it's an RPG. Now I know a very important part of story, one that may have been quite sad for me had it been a surprise, because someone was inconsiderate enough to put that picture there. I'm extremely disappointed. 216.89.144.18 18:18, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

It's the decision and consensus of WP:FF (it's in their Manual of Style) and WP:SE editors to not use Spoiler warnings where spoilers should be expected in an encyclopedia. Read the previous discussions and archives of even just this page for the major reasonings, and put up with it, because it doesn't show signs of changing any time soon. In short: We're not here to protect people from themselves. Nique talk 18:42, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

This topic is in far too many places. Please post new concerns in the existing thread. You'll find that many of your concerns have already been addressed there. --—ΔαίδαλοςΣΣ 19:05, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Just to clarify, it's the consensus of WP:FF, not a consensus of WP:SE. Spoiler Warnings can and should be (and are) used in non-FF related articles. Kariteh 20:50, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

• And how exactly would a spoiler warning would have made you miss that image as you scrolled down? You would've still scrolled down and seen the image. — Deckiller 21:28, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I would read and post in the current spoilers thread, but in it people have given away more of the story. That's real smart. "It's the decision and consensus of WP:FF (it's in their Manual of Style) and WP:SE editors to not use Spoiler warnings where spoilers should be expected in an encyclopedia." I don't care who's decision it is/was. I'm saying it was a BAD decision, or at least an INCONSIDERATE decision. And I expect spoilers to be in Wikipedia, regardless of the fact that it's an encyclopedia, because you use them everywhere else where appropriate. "We're not here to protect people from themselves." Fantastic! Then why are spoiler warnings used at all?!! Whatever you're here for, can you at least be consistent? "And how exactly would a spoiler warning would have made you miss that image as you scrolled down? You would've still scrolled down and seen the image." Did I say spoiler warnings would make me miss the image, or was I talking about both things separately? The point: please put spoiler warnings up AND remove the image.24.107.92.149 00:45, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

"We're not here to protect people from themselves." Fantastic! Then why are spoiler warnings used at all?!! Well yes, that's exactly how some of us feel. Noone owns a page, so the only way things like this happen is through consensus -- and the FF project's consensus is to not use the warnings. Same with the opera wikipreject, and there is a lot of fiction, especially "classics" that don't have the warnings. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 01:34, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

We are consistent- there are no spoiler tags in any FF page. Also, yeah, most of us don't think that there should be spoilers anywhere in WP, but hey. Also, and this is something I wonder everytime this discussion comes up, why the hell would you read the WP article on a game that you haven't played but are going to? it's going to ruin things. Finally, you obviously have never read the back cover of a book in your life if you think it doesn't spoil things. Any back cover is going to ruin the first quarter of the book at least, and I've read some that mentioned plot points that don't happen till well past halfway. Any WP article is going to go all the way to the end, spoiler tag or no, leaving out information is not what an encyclopedia is about. --PresN 03:20, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

The picture has also been debated. The consensus of the project is to keep the picture, because spoiler or no, it is an iconic image of the game as it is one of the most well-known scenes. And Wikipedia is not censored, so we will not remove information just because someone doesn't like it. --—ΔαίδαλοςΣΣ 19:45, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Wutai

Someone's forgotten to mention the fourth landmass...the western continent! Unless it's not relevant to the section, I dunno... --195.195.249.9 13:56, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Wutai isn't a fourth landmass, it is an archipelago that is part of the western continent. For that matter, Wutai is the name of the village, not the area. Wutai is an entirely optional location that only has any significance if you get an optional character, thus it is trivial in regards to game as a whole. --—ΔαίδαλοςΣΣ 15:52, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Youtube Links

Is posting Youtube videos on Wikipedia allowed? Especially videos that show the gameplay of a certain player's video game? — Bluerです。 ^なにか? 11:39, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

There might be times when a YouTube video could technically be 'allowed'...I'm not positive. FFMaster7's links don't belong here though since they are simply not notable. --OnoremDil 11:45, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Youtube videos are allowed when they are legal. Copyrighted stuff are definitely not allowed. Kariteh 14:13, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Abbreviations

I removed the abbreviations as per Wikipedia:WikiProject Final Fantasy/Manual of style#General Rules because these aren't allowed generally (i.e. RPG, PS1, WIN). Sjones23 19:49, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Combat subsection

References a "flaregamer.com" article as its primary source material, and yet the source article has no form of attribution. It talks about Nomura in third-person, never quoting him or providing any source of its own. For all I can see it is purely speculative. One problem in particular is that the article claims that Limit Breaks were a replacement for Desperation Attacks, however the Limit Breaks have much more in common with the unique special abilities that characters had in FF4 and FF6. In fact, some of the Limit moves are borrowed from the earlier games' specials, such as the Dragoon Jump. If a reliable source cannot be found for these statements, I think the entire portion of the Combat subsection where Nomura is discussed should be removed. Ham Pastrami 16:03, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

The flaregamer article cites its sources and has an editor staff; it is reliable enough for the subject at hand. They are a modified form of the Desperation attacks; similar concepts. The names of attacks have nothing to do with the actual concept. — Deckiller 16:12, 12 May 2007 (UTC)