Talk:Music of the Final Fantasy VII series

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Music of the Final Fantasy VII series has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Good topic star Music of the Final Fantasy VII series is part of the Music of the Final Fantasy series series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Albums (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Discographies (Rated A-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the Discographies WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's collection of discography articles and lists. If you would like to participate please visit the project page. Any questions pertaining to discography-related articles should be directed to the project's talk page.
A-Class article A  This article has been rated as A-Class on the quality scale.
WikiProject Songs (Rated GA-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.
WikiProject Square Enix (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Square Enix, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Square Enix-related merchandise and video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Video games (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

older comments[edit]

Meanwhile, in the science articles... silsor 07:27, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Merger of Redemption song[edit]

It would consolidate this page, and help it get to GA status. Judgesurreal777 01:02, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Done. Kariteh 10:23, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Apparently a more detailed rationale for the removal of the "Redemption" section is in order. Actually, when writing the June 24 revision of this page, I initially planned on keeping it, until it occurred to me how "One-Winged Angel" (much like "Eyes on Me" from FF8) really is a rather significant piece of music within the context of the game and probably the Final Fantasy series as a whole, while "Redemption" just isn't. The melody of "Redemption" is not a recurring theme within the soundtrack, the song has not been re-arranged and re-released several times, it is not a mainstay in the Music of Final Fantasy setlists, it does not exist within the game world and also isn't played during any poignant scene within the game, just the ending credits.

One would assume that any individual song worth pointing out within the context of this article, shares at least some of the characteristics "Redemption" lacks and there is no point in having an entirely redundant section stub for it. - Cyrus XIII 14:04, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Added lyrics for OWA. 12:43, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

It's illegal and was removed. Kariteh 15:06, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Soundtrack vs Sound Track[edit]

The standard way is to use the word "Soundtrack". However, we can see on the album cover that they use "Sound Track". Shold we use the 2 word variant, for accuracy, or stick with the standard "Soundtrack", for uniformity, on the grounds they typoed their cover?Happypal 04:33, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

The cover says "Sound Track", yet Square seems to have taken to "Soundtrack" since [1], so we could use either without straying from official spelling. I've changed the albums infobox for now, for consistency with the section header, but I would certainly support the exclusive use of "Soundtrack" throughout the article. - Cyrus XIII 07:17, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Well since you provide the source and link, I put it in the article. I'm not too accustomed to doing refs, so if anyone wants to double check...Happypal 07:46, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

That's what usually happens when non-English speakers attempt to write in English Of course its a typo. Over half of the song titles are typos too, not to mention the ENTIRE FFI&II is a course in incorrect English.

Correct English songs titles for Advent Children?[edit]

I changed the track titles for Disc 1, Track 7 and Disc 2, Tracks 2 & 3, based on two reference sources from:

Disc 1 - Track 7: "Let the Battles Begin! (Piano Version)" to "Those Who Fight (Piano Version"
Disc 2 - Track 2: "Let the Battles Begin! (FFVII AC Version)" to "Those Who Fight (FFVII AC Version)"
Disc 2 - Track 3: "Fight On! (FFVII AC Version)" to ""Those Who Fight Further (FFVII AC Version)"

These were changed back by Urutapu, stating "It's like people can't accept this is WHAT IS OFFICIAL or something". I am not disputing Urutapu's claim, however I cannot find anywhere which states that the track listings are correct - every site which has information on it generally has the titles that I changed them to, and the official Square Enix website (see here), although in Japanese, seems to literally translate more accurately to, for example, "Those Who Fight Further" than "Fight On!". Does anyone have any better knowlegde of the official English translated titles? - Arite 16:10, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Simple answer, modify the tracklist like that of Music of Final Fantasy X#Final Fantasy X Original Soundtrack. Provide a translation to the japanese title, and then an "official" name. This might not be optimal, but it's the ONLY way to solve these kind of official VS accurate never ending long term edit warsHappypal 03:29, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
Done, I think. You might need to double check :) Happypal 10:14, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
OK - thanks, the track listings have improved dramatically by displaying the original Japanese titles as well. I didn't know that there were official iTunes English titles. Cheers - Arite 12:10, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

"Those Who Fight" and "Those Who Fight Further" are incorrect on every occasion and should never be used.

WikiProject class rating[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 19:34, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

A small correction[edit]

It says that Gackt did voice acting and motion capturing for Dirge of Cerberus, which I changed to "he was filmed in live-action in front of a greenscreen and edited into the CGI environment". It was changed back because I didn't cite my sources (though there are absolutely no sources cited for the statement as it is now as well). Well, here is one: And here's behind the scenes footage:

Here a translation of an interview from the Jap. Famitsu mag:

So PLEASE change it back to the correct version. For now, I have completely deleted that statement as it doesn't have any sources cited (and is wrong anyway). 14:42, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Crisis Core OST[edit]

Can we add a section for the Crisis Core soundtrack? Both the cover art, tracklisting and other info are out now...DTwirler 18:26, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

OC ReMix?[edit]

this should be mentioned in the article with a link I believe —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:10, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

  • OverClocked Remix does not exist as a musical artist, its just a bunch of teens with too much time to waste. They don't release albums. Actual groups that exist in the real world release albums, not some people on the internet.
  • OverClocked ReMix clearly exists as a viable music entity, including several game audio professionals on the aforementioned album. Sorry you didn't win that one, random unsigned comment guy. :-) - Liontamer (talk) 15:34, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Crisis Core Trackslisting[edit]

Just at a glance, I can tell it's really inaccurate; Track 10 - 世に仇なす者 should be, "He who Seeks Revenge on the World", and Track 17 - 古の詩に詠まれし水辺 should be "He who Receives the Planet's Divine Protection", or at least, something closer to them. You can find the tracklisting in Japanese here: Someone should set it up with the Japanese and romaji too, the way the tracklisting for FFVII is. I'd do it, if I had the time, patience, or knew how. Some much more accurate translations were done here: —Preceding unsigned comment added by WtW-Suzaku (talkcontribs) 11:46, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I have begun updating with your too links. I'm out of time, so I will finish later. I will also add references. Thx for the help. You can check the code if you want to see how it is done.happypal (Talk | contribs) 01:29, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Requested Move[edit]

See Talk:Music_of_the_Final_Fantasy_series#Requested_moves. SDY (talk) 18:07, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Discography of Final Fantasy VII/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Another well-presented article, stability, neutrality, breadth (I'm particularly impressed with the information about One Winged Angel), fair use rationales and MOS all seem fine. There are a couple of small points I'd like you to look at before the article is passed:

  • Some of the tracklistings aren't referenced.
  • "Don of Square Enix Music Online was much harsher towards the album" It's a small issue, but describing his view as 'harsher' is actually judging rather than communicating his response, tweak please?
  • Reference 34 = dead. Since the company has been wound down it's not a surprise, could you find an alternative? If a link ever seems like it might not be there forever, don't be shy about archiving them via WebCite.

That's it, please drop me a note when you've dealt with the above. Someoneanother 19:28, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Alright, done done and done, thank you for reviewing! --PresN (talk) 21:10, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
A pleasure, for video game music fans this is an important article, and now it's a Good Article. Someoneanother 21:59, 13 August 2008 (UTC)


I'm not sure removing the infoboxes for releases without cover art is such a good idea, as it deprives this rather extensive article of some one-look accessibility. Was this up for discussion somewhere? – Cyrus XIII (talk) 12:30, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Check out the FAC page. The Prince (talk) 13:28, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
PR page, actually. --PresN 19:09, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

2nd Paragraph[edit]

At the beginning of the 2nd paragraph it states "The Compilation of Final Fantasy VII began 12 years after the release of Final Fantasy VII with the release of the animated film sequel Advent Children in 2005." However the original final fantasy VII was released (in Japan) on January 31, 1997 and in North America on September 7, 1997, making the statement of "12 years after" nonsensical. Fix it?

Clearly, I'm excellent at math. 8 years it is! BTW, for changes like that there's no need to ask on the talk page- you're clearly correct, so just go ahead and change the article directly. --PresN 04:11, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

A-class assessment[edit]

Given the previous discussion, changes and whatnot, not much for me to say here that wasn't already mentioned, so I support A-class for the article.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 07:49, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Well done researched and written. I'd support moving to A-class with the following two comments:

  • I may be splitting hairs but, in the lede it says "[t]he company created a soundtrack album for each of the titles in the collection." I like that the sentence illustrates cohesion in the Collection, but it jumps out at me that Before Crisis and Last Order share an album and thus each title does not have a soundtrack album since these two essentially have half an album.
  • Is there a track listing for Final Fantasy VII Advent Children Complete Mini Album?
I think I've fixed both of these. --PresN 21:58, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

No disagreement here, but it should be noted that Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums does not use the "A" grade in its assessment scheme. See here, (the Quality Scale section): So we have some project inconsistency here, but this article is tough to fit into a particular category of media products. Is this truly an Album article? Doomsdayer520 (Talk|Contribs) 08:43, 20 November 2009 (UTC)


Anyone else noticing that the references aren't showing up in the article. When previewing the page, I get this warning: Warning: Template include size is too large. Some templates will not be included., obviously referring to Template:Reflist. This is the last good version. Artichoker[talk] 17:30, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

The FF7 template isn't working either. That error shouldn't happen unless you go over like 100 templates, though... --PresN 17:44, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Ah. Somebody added "nihongo" templates to every single japanese track name- pushing the template count over the line. I'll fix it. --PresN 17:48, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Turn's out they've been there a long time, but with them all in there sometime recently the article had 2 too many templates. I've removed a bunch of them; they have no visible output change if you only have the one parameter. --PresN 17:59, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

What a joke...[edit]

As the original author of the Final Fantasy VII: Advent Children Original Soundtrack, I am horrified at how my article was butchered over time by the ridiculous edits that people made (without even being bothered to discuss them on the talk page), and then finally the remnants are shoehorned into this steaming pile you call an article. I spent considerable time researching information on that album for accuracy (despite the fact that I OWN the album and had much of the information in my hand), and then spent an equal amount of time putting the article together. And I did all this with references to back up my information, which apparently means little around here.

As it stands, the section regarding the FFVII:AC OST is riddled with opinions (much like the rest of this article) and has very little substance. I don't care if the opinions are those of established websites; an opinion is still an opinion. In addition, the track listing is horrendous. I would like to know when iTunes became the authority on all things music; the last time I checked, we were discussing the Soundtrack album itself as it was originally released, not what tracks you could download off the internet. The way I see it, if anyone knows what the tracks should be called, it would be the company that released them, not iTunes. I have not seen any proof offered that demonstrates that the track listing as it stands today is in any way accurate and comes off as POV. That is, you are naming the tracks the way you THINK they should be named, not going by the accurate and OFFICIAL translation. In fact, it's quite ironic that every reference that is given in that section almost completely contradicts the information contained therein.

In addition, I resent the two sentences that remain from my original article is noted as being referenced from a site that doesn't even make any mention of that information. The sentences in question are: In addition to the regular release, a limited edition was produced. It contained alternate cover art displaying the Advent Children renditions of the characters Cloud Strife and Sephiroth and a booklet containing credits and lyrics. Indeed while this may be so-called "original research" on my part, the fact remains that I, and I alone, provided this information and not the site that was credited. I ask that this information be removed on three grounds: One, that it is indeed original research and requires a citation. Two, that the aforementioned citation is not a valid one. Three, that as author of these two lines, I rescind the right for Wikipedia to continue displaying it. I rescind the right because it no longer has connection to the article that I wrote and I did not give permission to use my content in the manner in which it has been used. I will, however, allow the use of this information on the condition that it cites the original article in which it was found, or if someone takes the time and cites a valid reference for this information. Thank you for your cooperation. (talk) 13:35, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Whenever you edit, "You irrevocably agree to release your contributions under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL." I personally quit bothering during the great merges, the album image cover hunts, and the general destruction of most OST pages on wikipedia. I find there is a lot of bias on what is "notable content" or "POV" on wikipedia, regardless of citation or sources. I also resent the fact that "to have a better article", a lot of small but complete OST pages are merged into bigger articles, removing half of the OST's info. Nothing against FFVII, the FF project, or any wikipedia group in general. It's the general consensus of things. happypal (Talk | contribs) 14:02, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
I'll address several points.
  • One- you didn't write the FF7:AC OST article. about 15 people had their hand in it, and I don't know which of the ip addresses you were editing under.
  • Two- the last page before it was merged here back in 2007 is not something that I would term "well-researched". It's 6 sentences, which would take about 5 minutes to write if, as you say, you have the album. Note also that your two sentences are not in that article.
  • Three- Apple got their track names from Square Enix. If you don't think that a name is correct, change it. Preferably quote a source, but I long ago got tired of correcting minor translation differences in order to keep the track name as "the right one".
  • Four- if you think having a quick paragraph of reviews of the album and a sourced description of what the music sounds like makes the article "riddled with opinions", then you are correct. Unfortunately for you, they are information that is useful to the reader for understanding the album.
  • Five- You are correct, that site does not mention what is in the limited edition, only that one exists. It is for that reason, and that alone, that I will remove the uncited information, because...
  • Six- as mentioned above, you cannot "rescind your permission" to use your text because you specifically gave up that right when you wrote it here. The disclamer is right below the "save page" button.
  • Seven- directed at happypal- The "good short OST articles" you remember so fondly were in actuality one or two short, uncited paragraphs and a bland tracklist. Invariably. I know, because I'm the big bad editor that merged them all (at least for the Final Fantasy series and Chrono series; the other music articles I've written generally didn't even have those to start with). No OST articles ever lost information when they were merged (except, I'll admit, the FF7:AC article did mention that the two discs came in a double-sided cd tray, not two cases), though I too resent the loss of cover images, and they almost always gained information. I don't think that having 40-50 short stubs (even well-written stubs) on individual albums is preferable to 13 articles dividing them up by game. If you do, well, whatever. You should have written them then, and they wouldn't have been merged. --PresN 14:28, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
I think FFVII was well merged actually, so no complaint there. It really consolidated the bulk of the articles. So no anger directed at you (again, I found this to be a wikipedia-large trend). However, [2] and Supreme_Commander_(video_game)#Audio. The OST was merged into the game article. A multi paragraph+tracklist+music samples+infobox+cover art were all merged into a one sentence section. In this case, it is the contrary, a full article merged into a stub section. Sure, I could have fought to keep the article or to put more information back into the article, but once you've seen this happen to 10+ articles you have put time and effort into, you are too disgusted to put the effort back in again. I don't mind merging stuff, just not when it's done at the cost of content, in the name of "encyclopedic article", whatever that means. happypal (Talk | contribs) 14:55, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
Ugh, my sympathies. That is a really poor merge, and not something that makes the parent article any better. --PresN 15:09, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

In response to PresN, yes I did write the article. I was username XDB, which I will be happy to login under if you want proof (I really don't feel like logging in just to discuss this, but if you insist...). The majority of edits made after I created the article were merely cosmetic at best. My biggest complaint, which you have failed to address, is the fact that no one could be bothered to discuss the changes they were making and why. This includes your merge. No one ever dropped by the talk page and asked for my or anyone else's input who worked on that article, which by your estimate was "about 15 people". So that's 15 vs. 1 and none of them had any say in the future of the article. Again, this is my biggest beef. I could care less that people want to improve articles, but how about discussing what you like to do instead of taking it upon yourself to do whatever with it like you personally wrote the thing yourself?

As far as the comment about it being only 6 sentences. You know, I don't know, I don't have access to the article anymore so I can't say what shape you found my article in. But I can assure you, there was far more information in my version than just 6 sentences. I contend that perhaps I made an unfair judgment as far as some of my work being plagiarized, as again, I don't have access to the original article. As far as surrendering my rights when I submit my work, I don't recall all this licensing mumbo-jumbo littering my screen back then, maybe it was always there but just not in my face like it is now.

My comment on opinions was perhaps a bit harsh. I really feel that this is a section that could use some improvement. Perhaps list the sales of the album or the number of tracks from this album downloaded from iTunes to date. Something, anything that falls squarely within the realm of fact. Just because it was "critically well received" doesn't change the fact whether people actually bought the album, which in my opinion is the best measure of success of a product.

I know I am kinda writing this response a bit out of order, sorry. You also stated: "Apple got their track names from Square Enix. If you don't think that a name is correct, change it. Preferably quote a source". Problem is, I have always listed what I believed to be the correct track listing, with 3 or 4 sources mind you (including the Square-Enix site itself), but it did nothing to sway people from just barging in and making edits that suited their position without being bothered to discuss why they felt the need to change the whole page around. After several rounds of reverting and attempting to fight off this madness, I finally had enough and walked away from the article. That was my decision and I don't regret it. I probably have no right to argue about the state of the article now, but I feel I need to state my position on that article which was indeed my own original contribution to this site. This is all I have to say on the matter. (talk) 11:52, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

OK, I see the links you provided, PresN, to the original article. I admit that even in my original version, the article was a little sparse. But like anything else on this site, it was a work in progress. At the time I wrote the article, it was still solely a Japanese item that had to be imported. Naturally, there was little to work with. I didn't have the benefit of American or otherwise English-language reviews from IGN and whatnot like you guys have now. At the time I started the article, it was so new that even Japanese language information was sparce. I intended to add as much relevant and factual info as I possibly could, even if it meant having to translate some Japanese sources. The problem is, as I stated above, I ended up spending much of my time in a continuous edit-war that impeded my ability to actually get anything useful done with the article. What's the point in adding a bunch of nice new shiny stuff if someone is just gonna come along and destroy it as fast as you can add it? Of course, if you look at the edit history, you'll find I really didn't stick with the article long. That is because I have a short-fuse and an intolerance for fools. It really didn't take much to drive me away, which I suppose is better than blowing up at people and making myself look the fool. So I just calmly ducked out of the article before I really got mad. The point of all this chatter? Not much. Just trying to get the facts straight here. I'll quit PMSing here and leave you guys to your article now. Peace. Oh yeah, and here's a link to the most recent talk page that pretty much validates everything I've said so far. XDB (talk) 12:08, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
Well, the article had already been merged here before I started working on it, so I never saw that talk page. Sorry. I agree that you didn't have much to work with at the time, and you wrote the best article you could. Even if I had seen that talk page, though, it wouldn't have changed much, as by your own admission you weren't hanging around the page, so I had no real reason to reach out to you. I try to work under the bold, revert, discuss cycle- I just go ahead and make the changes I want, especially if no one else is actively editing the article, and if anyone has a problem with what I've done then I discuss it with them. I'm also impatient, like you- I don't have time to discuss every change I make to an article, especially if I don't think anyone's going to complain about it.
As far as the iTunes stuff goes, I agree with your findings, that people constantly come in and change the names to whatever they feel like. I just picked a version and ran with it- most of these FF albums don't have official English track names before their iTunes release, but do have 3 different variants of fan-translations kicking around the internet. Again, if you feel that a translation is wrong, just change it, I won't stop you. As far as sales numbers go, yeah, that would be great. They're impossible to find. I have some estimates from Oricon about the sales of the OSTs of various games, but nothing in regards to the secondary albums or Advent Children. --PresN 13:39, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
I apologize. I've been acting quite the asshole so far, and it was uncalled for. Keep up the good work. XDB (talk) 06:44, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Advent Children Complete Reunion Tracks[edit]

I think I've come across an official album not mentioned here. Track ordering and length are unlike those of albums in the article. I've checked and it's mentioned in several places. Sources:

If this is already in the article I'm going to feel so stupid. It's just that it's not mentioned in name anywhere on here... Eagle Pilot (talk) 18:12, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Aerith's Theme Classic FM HOF[edit]

I've added that FF7 song Aerith's Theme made it into a top 300 classical music compositions HOF but I'm relatively new to Wikipedia so can someone provide the reference at the bottom and maybe rephrase it better? (talk) 00:35, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Fort Condor[edit]

The Japanese name of the song "Fort Condor" is actually 鷲の砦. It appears that at some point, someone miscopied it as 鷺, which indeed does appear similar, but is wrong. I see this mistake on both and this Wikipedia article; did Wikipedia get the track titles from amazon's track list?

In any case, I tracked down the physical copy and it does say 鷲. I did find some places online which have the correct track title, though you can find plenty more:

So hopefully that's enough info for me to fix the mistake without it being reverted. Snailplane (talk) 12:41, 18 September 2012 (UTC)