Game Review

Final Fantasy Review

USA USA Version

Posted by Corbie Dillard

The game that kicked off the most popular RPG series in existence.

Role-playing games began their climb to popularity during the early 80's on the many personal computers of the time period. These turn-based titles brought a more strategic element to gaming for those looking to use their minds more than their reflexes. Square obviously saw the importance and lure of the genre when they decided to create an RPG series of their own on Nintendo's fledgling Famicom system in Japan. The game became an immediate hit with Japanese gamers. While the game didn't immediately catch on with gamers outside of Japan, later releases in the series did and transformed the series into the most popular RPG franchise in video game history.

Final Fantasy is about as basic an RPG gameplay experience as you're likely to encounter. The command lists are short by today's standards, as is the turn-based combat system itself. You wander around on a world map from place to place, each offering up unique quests for you to take part in. These include everything from locating certain objects to battling powerful enemies in order to rescue characters that are in danger. There is a rather linear flow to the game's storyline, but you'll find this necessary in keeping with the flow of events the game lays out for you.

As you travel around the many areas of the game you'll be tossed into random enemy encounters in which you'll have to do battle. Battle commands are selected through menus that allow you to attack using a weapon, use magical spells, or even make use of certain items you've collected throughout your adventure. As you defeat enemies, your characters will gain experience points that will allow them to level up, thus becoming more powerful. You'll also earn money that can be used to purchase better weapons, armor, and specialty items, something you'll find quite necessary for your survival throughout the game.

While the control itself is fairly good, even by today's standards, the pacing of the game is what tends to hold the game back. Not only do your characters move around fairly slowly, but even the menu selections during combat can be a lesson in futility given their sluggish execution. Perhaps gamers have become spoiled by today's standards of run buttons and rapidly skipping through combat selections one right after another, but whatever the reason, it will likely be a little tedious for those who are not prepared for the way this game is set up from a gameplay standpoint. This is further highlighted during the long grinding sessions you'll likely have to endure in order to keep your characters adequately leveled up throughout various points in the game. While it's not what you would call detrimental to the overall playing experience, it's something to consider for those who prefer a more streamlined RPG experience.

Visually, Final Fantasy is about what you'd expect from an 8-bit offering. There's very little animation in the game, with even the battles showing very little of what's actually taking place during combat. Even the water itself doesn't feature any movement at all. That's not to say that the game doesn't have its moments, as many of the enemies show a good amount of detail in their design, but much of the landscapes you'll be traversing look fairly generic, even by 1987 standards. Of course, given that the game was created fairly early on in the 8-bit era, it's a bit understandable that the game doesn't have some of the visual flash many later NES releases displayed.

Chances are if you've ever played any Final Fantasy title in the series' 22-year history, you're going to recognize some of the musical tracks in this original release. And what makes them particularly interesting is the way Square was able to bring so much melody into the game using the NES console's limited sound capabilities. If you're a fan of 8-bit musical scores, you're likely to find a lot to like with this release, as it's one of the best ever crafted. It might not be the fully orchestrated musical scores we have with today's console RPGs, but it's every bit as catchy and charming in its own unique way.


Before full-motion video and voiced dialog began to dominate RPGs, Square's first Final Fantasy introduced the world to the console RPG and kickstarted a series that's still going strong some two decades later. Sure the game is showing its age and does feel a bit sluggish by today's more efficient RPG standards, but you still can't deny the importance and impact the game has had on the RPG genre and console gaming in general. If you enjoyed this NES original back in the day you'll likely enjoy taking it out for a spin, if only for the sake of reliving your memories of the game, but if you've become used to the brisk pacing of the more modern RPGs you'll likely find this release somewhat tedious.

From the web

User Comments (108)



CanisWolfred said:

This is honestly the game that got me into the series(but it definitely wasn't my first, mind you), and it's still a great RPG to this day. Yes, it is showing its age, but it's still by no means unenjoyable. With enough patience, it really does shine. It's definitely in my top 5 favorite Final Fantasy games. and one of my favorite RPGs of all time.



Noire said:

If I can get past how influential this game was and still is to this day (nothing in my JRPG-loving world would be the same without this), I agree with the review. It's a lot of fun for me, seeing the genre's roots, laughing at Garland's "I knock you all down," but the speed can grate on my nerves sometimes, and I can only take so much grindin'. Good review, Corbie.

Now we just need Final Fantasies IV and VI. Get 'em on the ready line, Ninty!



Pastry said:

This looks great! I'll get it as my free NES game! (or should I get StarTropics?)



Strofan7 said:

Here's my question, the first game i really played was a link to the past. I love games of this nature but I'm wondering is nostalgia is the only reason to get this game? Is it good enough to play fresh now? Or would it just leave me wanting a newer one?



EdEN said:

I'd go with a 9 for the score. Sure, nostalgia plays a biiiig part in forgiving NOW how this RPG feels "dated, slow and of high difficulty", but remembering it back in the day upon release (I was on vacation on Tucson when I got it on launch day) and even as far as 5 years ago when I did my last full play of it (with an all White mage squad), a 7 seems low.

Still, opinions come and go. This release on VC just made me want to give it another go on the NES...



Corbs said:

That's tough to answer. I loved the game back in the day, so it's fun to revisit it, but even I can admit that it's not aged as well as I'd like. The PSP remake probably didn't help me, since it was a much brisker paced game.



CanisWolfred said:


That's kinda tough to say. I first played this game a year ago, and I didn't even like RPGs at the time, so I personally don't think that nostalgia is the only reason to get this game, but I gotta say, it does require quite a bit of patience to play this game, as well as some amount of strategy for the battles.

And I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "games of this nature", but I kinda get the jist of it, so I'm just gonna go ahead and say give it a try, especially if you're getting the free NES game rebate, in which case then you're not losing any money on it at least.



Draygone said:

"The game became an immediate hit with Japanese gamers. While the game didn't immediately catch on with gamers"
That's sorta contradicting, there. Did you mean didn't catch on with gamers outside Japan? I might've also mentioned how targeting an enemy that gets killed results in a wasted turn, but from my experience, that's the case with every NES RPG and is probably already expected by those who have played such old games.

I can agree with the rating, though. (Speaking of, somebody needs to remind me what happened to the user ratings.)

And what's this about free NES games? Did I miss something?



Hardy83 said:

Game WAS amazing but it didn't age well at all. Some will want a higher score for nostalgic reasons, but anyone new to RPGs is best trying the later FF games like V or VI or even the Playstation ones.



Strofan7 said:

@mickeymac thanks for the help. and I was one of the few "unfortunate" ones who got the internet channel right when it came out so no rebate for me. i think a few VC's are on the list ahead of this but I plan to give it a shot sometime. after all its only $5, and i spend more than that doing pretty much whatever else i'd be doing so why not?



grenworthshero said:

Nice. I hope this is evidence of more FF games to be released soon on VC. And just in time for me to snag my free NES title.



Adamant said:

@myself, in that forum thread on the game: "I'll also be very positively surprised if I don't disagree completely with the not yet posted review, though I'm not keeping my hopes up. "

Well, it was less negative than expected, that's nice. No mention of the near-infinite replay value offered by the job system, though?

And yeah, the game does not require grinding at any point. If you feel you need to grind, you're just not playing smart enough.

Easy 10/10. Best FF game ever, one of the best NES games ever, possibly one of the best RPGs ever. No nostalgic attachment either - I didn't play this until 2001 or so. It's just that good.

(oh, and the PSP version sucks hard, as does the GBA version. Scientifically proven fact.)



cheetahman91 said:

I agree with the 7/10. Even though it is a fun game, it has not aged that well. When IV comes out, I predict a 9/10. I think this should be higher than Phantasy Star though. That game has aged horribly!



Corbs said:

@ Adamant - I had to review this game from the "every gamer" perspective, not a big Final Fantasy fan. And scientifically proven? The PSP version is a great version of the game. But everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

Brings back great memories though. I skipped a summer college course test to go pick this game up the day it came out. Spent almost all night playing it. Good times.



rhythmheavenfan said:

I'm very glad this has finally come out. I've never tried the Final Fantasy series so I thought why not start from the beginning?



MrPinguy said:

A fair review, if we are considering the fact that we are in 2009.
But i think it's worth an 8 or 9, or gamers these days are so sleepy and games really pass themselfs, that can't use this kind of battle interface?

Yes we already know that you don't like the GBA/PSP version...
It's becoming more anoying than Corbie with EarthBound.

But now seriosly while the GBA/PSP made FFI too much easy (i still like them, i'm not an purist like Adamant regarding FFI). I welcomed the changes in GBA/PSP FFII, it really made the game more enjoyable.
I still have nightmares about the original's (NES/PS1remake) Pandaemonium.



Corbs said:

It's becoming more anoying than Corbie with EarthBound.

Really? I thought I was way more annoying!



Adamant said:

Wait, my "FF1 GBA/PSP sucks" tirade is getting more annoying than my "Golden Sun sucks" tirade? I need to up my game at that one.

Hm, should I introduce Nintendolife to my dislike of the MGS games too, mayhaps?

(and hey, I'm not that much of an NES FF1 purist. The Wonderswan and PSX remakes of the game were awesome. I just don't like horrible remakes that completely ruin games I like, that's all)

@Corbie: "The PSP version is a great version of the game"

Nuh-uh. Can't argue with science



Reala said:

If I ever have a spare 500 points i think I'll give this game a go, hope they don't make it 600 points for Europe.



Stuffgamer1 said:

@Corbie: No, you aren't more annoying. Not even close. You talk about how you just don't like the game. You're entitled to that; no game is for EVERYBODY, right? Adamant gushes about the original version of Final Fantasy 1 in a way that sounds epically insane. That's WAY more annoying.

@Adamant: I want to respect your opinion, but I'm having trouble with it because it just seems so incredibly ludicrous! I mentioned it to a friend who's a bigger FF fan than I, and he had some not-nice-at-all things to say that I shan't repeat. It seems there is a label for people who think like you regarding FF, and it's none-too-positive.

Personally, I'll take IV, X, XII, and even II above I. Haven't spent enough time with most of the others to speak for them. I'll take I over VII, though...provided it's the PSP version.




Hey! I think I played this game back in the day (but probably got no where near completing it knowing me). It was banging.



Kevin said:

Personally I think the game deserves an 8 or a 9 but I think this review's score is fair enough. Great review Corbie!



Chunky_Droid said:

Yeah, 7's about fair for me. As Corbie's doing it from an "every-gamer" perspective.

A lot of people haven't played this version, and fantastic a game it is of its time, the PSX and GBA versions IMO polish it just that little bit more.

Oh, and Square really need to add an Armoire of Invulnerability



Bass_X0 said:

hope they don't make it 600 points for Europe.

They have to. Its the standard import tax for all games not released in a country originally.

I just don't like horrible remakes that completely ruin games I like

You say 'ruin', I say 'modernise'. A perfect NES port in terms of gameplay but with the graphics, sound and presentation of the PSP game would truly have been hated by all. However, I do think an "original mode" should have been included in the game which did revert the gameplay back to the 1987 NES version for better or worse. But to just have released the NES game with pretty graphics would have been shooting themselves in the foot. Regular PSP gamers would not care for the difficulty level and anything else you hold dear about the NES game. Square only 'ruined' the game to make it sell better.



retro_player_22 said:

This game (not counting the remakes) alongside the Super Star Wars trilogy previously released on VC are among the many challenging games I've ever play right there with Battletoads, Zelda II, Contra 3, The Lion King, and Ghosts 'N' Goblins.



Gizmo said:

@ Adamant: Why sucks the GBA version? For me the remakes of FF I & II for the GBA are very good.

@ Review: I also think a 7 is fair and a 9 would be way too high.



Objection said:

Adamant doesn't like the GBA version because the difficulty was "toned down." For me, at least, I felt that it was perfect balance and FFIandII:DOS is my second favorite FF, behind FFX. Because I have said GBA game, I won't be getting this.



Egg_miester said:

one thing i have to say is the game does deserve a 7 sadly it was never a great game when put up next to dragon quest or phantasy star but ff1 was fun



The_Fox said:

I'd point out that I think the game deserves a 5 at the very best, but I fear that would make Adamants head explode.



Ricardo91 said:

@Adamant. How exactly does the GBA version "completely ruin" the game? Besides the overly-easy difficulty (which I kinda liked, since I hate RPGs that are heavy on grinding)?



romulo said:

I still have the original NES cart here! But I really do think the remakes are much better, even with their easy difficulty setting. (I also have the PSX and PSP remakes.)



JayArr said:

Adamant is completely right about the remakes being overly easy. He also right about this version not requiring grinding if you use your brain.

It's a shame most RPGs anymore let you mash attack through the whole game with little to no thought into strategy. This game makes me yearn for the challenge of old.

From Corbies stance as "everyday gamer" this review score is dead on. From a stance of an old school RPG purist it's a straight up 10/10. Nice review Corbie.



OrionLee said:

With it being 600 points in UK/Europe, does this mean its not eligible for the free NES game offer?



Bass_X0 said:

That is correct, Razzle Dazzle. Only 500 Point NES games are available for the free download since you only paid 500 points for the Internet Channel. The Internet Channel is the only thing Nintendo is giving away free to everyone, not additional points.

It's a shame most RPGs anymore let you mash attack through the whole game with little to no thought into strategy.

Considering the hundreds of battles you get in, having to think of a strategy each time would be tedious.



OrionLee said:

How disappointing. I always wanted to play the first final fantasy (never played the others, wanted to play them chronologically.) when i heard it was coming to VC, i thought "brilliant, this is my free NES game", yet it was not to be.



Bass_X0 said:

We don't even know when the next Hanabi Festival is or if it will appear in the next festival, I'm assuming it will though. But yeah, it'll cost 600 points.



aaronsullivan said:

It was interesting for me making the transition from computer RPGs like the Ultima series and Wizardy and Bard's tale to the console stuff.

Games like this were an interesting hybrid, but Phantasy Star on the Master System (and to a lesser extent Miracle Warriors) and then Final Fantasy IV(II in the US) won me over big time. Still, the Ultima games (like IV and V) on computers not the NES remakes, hold up WAY better than the early RPGs on consoles for me anyway. Much more involving despite the inferior graphics performance.

One highlight was the real cloth map you had to constantly refer to and the physical journal (in the box) that you had to refer to in order to traverse a section of the game safely. Watching the phases of the moon to teleport around. In Ultima IV actually having to practice 8 virtues (including compassion and truth and spirituality) to succeed. Okay, I'm off in nostalgiaville, now. See ya.



aaronsullivan said:

quote: Considering the hundreds of battles you get in, having to think of a strategy each time would be tedious.

WAH? I guess I don't understand RPGs anymore. So, what is combat for if you don't even have to make decisions then? Artificial game length boosting? Seriously, if you aren't making decisions how is it a "game" and not just a cinematic?



Earendel68 said:

I remember the time when I finished this game for the firts time. Wonderful memories!!!



Adamant said:

Yeah, I don't get that "having to think of a strategy each time would be tedious." quote either. If you don't want to put any effort into the battles, but prefer them to be "push A a couple times while watching the same cinematics you've seen a hundred times before" minigames, why are you even playing RPGs in the first place? How about playing an adventure game or watching a movie? It's the same thing minus those tedious "push A 20 times to proceed" breaks.
Sorry, I don't see how eliminating the actual gameplay counts as "upgrading". Would you also advocate having only a fifth of the enemies in the next Mario game being able to damage you "because there's hundreds of them, and it would be tedious having to avoid them all?

"Regular PSP gamers would not care for the difficulty level and anything else you hold dear about the NES game."

But they would care for the mostly non-existant plot, the non-existant character development, and the total lack of cinematics? It seems they mostly tell themselves they like these remakes because it says Final Fantasy on the box, so it MUST be good.

Seriously, those of you who claim the GBA and PSP remakes are good, or even better than the original... what exactly do you like about them? Are you even capable of naming a single thing about the games that you found enjoyable besides "it was kind of interesting to see how the series started"? After removing everything enjoyable from the original, they didn't actually add anything new, so... what is there to like?



Stuffgamer1 said:

@longtimegamer: Start here and read forward. All will be revealed.

@Adamant: I enjoy games that retain some level of old-school design without going TOO far. For me, the PSP version of FFI is actually the perfect balance. The NES original would just frustrate me with everything from the lack of auto-retargetting to the four character limit on the names of basically everything. The PSP version is pretty, with beautifully modernized music, and still retains enough old-school feel to be great fun to me. Does that answer your question?



DjPhatskillz said:

"Adamant gushes about the original version of Final Fantasy 1 in a way that sounds epically insane" its like hearing stravinsky talk about music or copernicus talk about space. the dude is a old school gaming wizard.



vherub said:

I could never beat Final Fantasy on the nes (or most games then, including Dragon Warrior).
It wasn't until the gba when I could save more readily that I finished it.
All nes rpgs felt roguelike- in that you could sink an hour of leveling up or exploring and have it be completely wasted if you died.
Dying without accomplishing anything bothered me then, and it bothers me even more now. It sucks all the fun out of a game.



Marky_Mark said:

Here's an interesting thought..... I wonder what the odds are of SE releasing the Jap Final Fantasy II, III NES imports (translated obviously) on the VC? Other imports have been released on the VC that were never orginally in North America oe Europe. Now that would be cool!



Ricardo91 said:

"Seriously, those of you who claim the GBA and PSP remakes are good, or even better than the original... what exactly do you like about them?"

  • Retains most of what made the original game good (multiple job choices adding tons of replay value, old-school gameplay, ect.)
  • Makes the difficulty more accessible to people who don't like wandering around the same area for 3 hours, fighting the same monsters over and over again just so they can enter the next dungeon without dying at the door (though I'll agree with you that made it a bit too easy)
  • 4 (5 in the PSP version's case) new dungeons featuring bosses from other FF games
  • Better translation, spells and names aren't restricted to 4 letters
  • Great remixed music
  • contains a bestiary

Really, the pathetic difficulty and ability to save anywhere (should've gone with the quicksave like all the other portable FFs) were the ONLY ways in which the GBA version was worse than the original. If you prefer the game in it's original form, that's fine, but don't go criticizing people for thinking that the remakes were better. That's their opinion.



Draygone said:

@14. Adamant
And yeah, the game does not require grinding at any point. If you feel you need to grind, you're just not playing smart enough.
You cannot tell me that you never had to spend an hour or so grinding for money in order to afford the extremely expensive stuff. Even if you do play smart, like exploring bits of a dungeon at a time rather than the whole things at once, you're going to reach a point where you have to stop and do some extra monster farming.

I'll agree about the GBA version of the game, though. They skrewed the balancing big-time. Changing the magic level charges to regular MP didn't help. I stopped after exploring the first new optional dungeon. That's where it seemed the balancing went out the window, with regular encounters that were pitifully easy and bosses that I probably shouldn't have tried fighting until later in the game. Yes, that's right. The new dungeons killed it for me.

The PS1 version seems to be the best version. All they did with the gameplay was enable auto-targeting and using Life in battle, and boosted all the boss' HP a little to make up for it, and gave those who wanted it an "Easy Mode" where gold and EXP came faster. And of course there was the better graphics, sound, and translation (though I missed "Here lies Erdrick"), and the beastiary and a treasure guide. Incidentally, they boosted boss HP even more for the GBA version, and even more than that for the PSP version. Shows how much they were messing with the game balance in each remake.



Adamant said:

@Draygone: "You cannot tell me that you never had to spend an hour or so grinding for money in order to afford the extremely expensive stuff."

Sure I can. If you can't afford something at the time it becomes available, just continue on with the game and come back for it later. What is this extremely expensive stuff you're talking about, anyway? The silver sword and the steel armor are the only items that really fit in the "Holy Jesus that's expensive" category - the armor is a complete waste of money, and the sword you can do without until you come across enough to afford it. Running back and forth outside the town to kill monsters for money isn't needed.



Kelvin said:

I think this should be higher than Phantasy Star though.
Now that's fighting talk!



CanisWolfred said:

I don't think I've ever had to equipment grind in Final Fantasy(any Final Fantasy game, actually - they're pretty good about giving you enough money). I was usually good enough with what I picked up in dungeons and stuff. I did have to level-grind a few times, mostly at the beginning, but it was never more than a level or two, and never really took all that long.

And the next time they remake this game, I hope S-E adds a hard mode, so it plays more like the original if you wanted to. The PSX version had it, I can't see why they wouldn't include it in the later games.

Oh, and who else is looking forward to Final Fantasy Gaiden? I know I am!



Metang said:

It's aged, but definitely enjoyable. An RPG giant that deserves at least an 8. (It's pretty much common knowledge, however, that its sequels are better.)



leon809 said:

I dont understand how a worthless wiiware title can get over a 7/10 when everyone knows that we might not even remember it but the first game in the biggest rpg franchise gets that poo score!!!!!!! UNFRICKEN BELIEVABLE



astarisborn94 said:

A good week for the Virtual Console, here's to hoping that we get Final Fantasy II (IV) on the North American Virtual Console soon. I actually really want that game.



CanisWolfred said:

Common Knowledge? I wouldn't say that. Every game in the series is pretty different, so which ones you like more all depends on your tastes. I will say that I liked some of the sequels more than FF1, usually because of something unique that it offered over the rest of the series, not because they were overall better games...but that's just me.

And I'd like to see FF4 as well, just so I can finally finish it.



primeris said:

7 is fair. I loved the game, I played on the original cart so many times I can't even give a ballpark estimate. I tried every possible combination I can think of.
Nowadays, I'd rather play it on an emulator with a frameskip key.
Grinding is necessary, and it's just not fun. I don't know how I could put up with it back then.



brooks83 said:

Why is everyone hating on Adamant for stating his opinion? I grew up with this game and was able to beat it (yes, the NES version) when I was in elementary school. If you use your head, it's really not that difficult. I have never played the GBA or PSP remakes (though the PSone remake was great), but I would be mad about them toning down the difficulty.

@Stuffgamer1 Who cares what your friend has to say about Adamant's opinion? As if your friend's alleged opinion somehow makes Adaman't opinion invalid? Considering you found the controls in Pilotwings to be too hard, I can understand why you think the NES version of Final Fantasy is too hard too, but why are you attacking Adamant? I grew up with the NES version of Final Fantasy, so it could be mostly nostalgia speaking, but I wouldn't change it for the world. And I also consider it to be my favorite Final Fantasy game.



CanisWolfred said:

"Why is everyone hating on Adamant for stating his opinion?"
Because he challenged the opinions of everyone who likes the remakes.

How do you do a solo run? Do you just press start after picking your first guy or something?



Adamant said:

To do a solo run, start a normal game, then get three of your four characters killed in the first battle. Run away, save, and never revive them.



LinktotheFuture said:

One of my friends is going a solo run with a thief, right now he is up to level 20, but Astos keeps casting RUB on him.



Adamant said:

Yep, that happens. The game wasn't intended to be played this way, so it doesn't necessarily play fair. RUB doesn't have a 100% hit rate, so the "trick" to that battle is to just keep trying until he eventually misses with the spell.



Stuffgamer1 said:

@brooks83: The friend in question knows a LOT more about the Final Fantasy fandom than I do, and recognized a label to fit Adamant into by my description of his posts alone. I never actually said that was going to MATTER to anybody...just pointing out that people like Adamant have an unpleasent reputation even among most FF fans. Considering Adamant implied that anyone who likes the GBA or PSP versions is an idiot, I thought it MIGHT prove useful to point out that the majority disagree.

And what the HELL does Pilotwings have to do with this? Last I checked, being bad at one genre of games doesn't affect your skill at another, ESPECIALLY when excessive Mode 7 is used in the former. I never said FFI was too hard, just too unfun due to its archaic gameplay.

I don't mind at all if it's your favorite FF game...just so long as you don't assert that it should be EVERYBODY'S and attack our tastes like Adamant has been. No stating opinions as "scientific fact," basically.



brooks83 said:

Well I think when he says it's a scientific fact, I think there is a tiny bit of sarcasm there. I mean obviously he thinks it's the best FF game, but I don't think he actually believes it's an undisputed fact. At the end of the day it's just an opinion, I'm sure there are games that you love that Adamant hates. Point is, don't take it too personal.



Adamant said:

...people actually took the "scientific fact" comment seriously? I mean, really?



Stuffgamer1 said:

@brooks83: The only problem I had was that he didn't state it as though it was an opinion. I don't go around stating my opinions as fact...that's just a sure-fire way to start an argument! So when a person states his opinion in a way that suggests it is fact and everyone who disagrees is just plain wrong, that MAKES it personal.

@Adamant: Not in a literal sense, as if science were actually involved, but yes, I did take you quite seriously on your assertion that the NES version is good and GBA and PSP are crap. Any sarcasm there may have been was lost in a sea of "my opinion is the only right one" attitude. Having conversed with you before, I know that's what to expect. Sarcasm really doesn't seem to be one of your stronger suits.



Ragnor said:

I cracked up at the screenshot of Garland, with the characters named after the staff. So Dazz is the pimp of the team, and Damo is the fragile healer with questionable gender?

I dont recognise the Black Mage though, whos that one?



Gizmo said:

@ Adamant:

Ricardo91 (Post 56) replied on your question: "what exactly do you like about them?" very detailed, so why do you not react to his answer?



primeris said:

It's a scientific fact that you all need to step away from the Internet and play some console videogames.
Any videogame.



Lotice-Paladin said:

Final Fantasy is a good game at it's core but I couldn't possibly play the NES version unfortunately. I guess I'm lazy, lol. I am more put off by the battle dialogue and borders rather then the graphics. A score of 7 is a good move, imo



Stuffgamer1 said:

@Ragnor: I hadn't noticed that screenshot...cool! And the black mage is Ant, the guy who does most of the actual coding work on this site, apparently. He doesn't really post around here too often.

@primeris: Oh, don't worry. I've been spending lots and lots of time playing games in between posts.



hedless said:

To anyone that thinks this is a grind game that is difficult should try playing the original Dragon Warrior game for the NES. Losts of grinding and very long and boring, and extremely easy to get killed by wondering into places you are not ready for.

Aside from that, I think this game rocked and got me into the FF series. Should have been rated higher in my opinion, especially since your classes upgrade which doesn't happen often in RPG games now a days or back then. I actually miss that element of classes upgrading later on in the game. As for my favorite "classic" FF would have to be 3, or 6 depending on which country it was for.

This is definitely a game I'm picking up for VC.



TKOWL said:

i may not get this game due to the insane difficulty factor or the LONG PLAIN WALKS



CanisWolfred said:

To anyone that thinks this is a grind game that is difficult should try playing the original Dragon Warrior game for the NES. Losts of grinding and very long and boring, and extremely easy to get killed by wondering into places you are not ready for

Yeah, I agree 110%! In fact, my experience with Dragon Warrior, along with several othe NES RPGs, is actually part of the reason why I like Final Fantasy 1 so much - it's honestly one of the most playable NES RPGs ever made! It's so much more fair, and a lot less tedious than any of the other games I've played. Heck, it's even better than some of the early Genesis and Super NES RPGs.

As for my favorite "Classic" FF, it would probably have to be a tie between FF3(NES, not the crummy DS remake) and FF5. I simply can't get enough of those games! Heck, compared to them, a lot of the other FFs just come off as bland, IMO. Actually, I'd say they're among my all time favorite RPGs!



Meffaliss said:

Final Fantasy 1=
Dude" A vampire has atacked the city! Go kill him! "
Player".....ok......where did he go? "
Dude" I will not tell you! Go on and find him by yourself like a true hero! "
Player" .................thanks.............jerk "
the RPG that started it all, is not helpful -"
But heck, as long as you love RPG, you'll love the first FF -.



Adamant said:

Yes. Lock, Temper and Saber have no effect, Xfer has no effect when used by a player (but works when monsters use it), and Lock2 boosts enemy evade instead of reducing it. Also, the spell Heal2 is bugged, and has the effect of Heal3 when cast in battle (this is good).



Adamant said:

@Ricardo91: Sorry, didn't see your post before. Still, I don't really get what you're trying to say. Apart from mentioning the direct upgrades to the game (which, while interesting, are also found in the PS1 version), all you mention is some erroneous claim that the original somehow required grinding (and for 3 hours at a time, even) and some vague allusion to "old-school gameplay". Old-school how? The way it doesn't have much of a plot? It all just seems like you're saying "FF1 is much more entertaining to play if I use a Game Genie to make all my characters level 50 from the get-go, so I don't have to worry about actually thinking about what I'm doing in battle if I want to live", which is kind of along the lines of "SMB1 is more fun if I make Mario not take damage from being hit, so I don't have to worry too much about having to avoid all those enemies".
It just doesn't make sense.



CanisWolfred said:


Believe it or not, some people don't play RPGs for their gameplay, so being forced to battle a lot makes the game less appealing to those kinds of people.



Stuffgamer1 said:

@Adamant: That list of bugs isn't making me want the NES version any more, y'know. If anything, it's hurting your assertion that it is the best.

@Mickeymac: I don't know about Adamant, but I can believe that. Some RPG's have great stories and "meh" gameplay. The BEST RPG's are good at both, of course, but even then some people won't care.



Adamant said:

But FF1 barely even HAS a story. The game wouldn't appeal to those people regardless of whether it requires thinking in battles or not.

Those bugs are hardly gameplay-breaking. Plus they were fixed in the PS1 version anyway.



CanisWolfred said:

I'm not gonna lie - I don't understand why people like the Dawn of Souls version either. Because it's easy, perhaps? Why would anyone want the ending handed to them on a silver platter? Just a waste of time, I'd say. But a lot of people do, apparently, and I'll never understand why.

And just to get this off my chest: the Dawn of Souls version reminds me exactly of what I thought every RPG was like, back when I thought all RPGs sucked(which was, like, 2 years ago) - No challenge whatsoever, a lame story I could less about, little-to-no exploration, gameplay that seemed like it offered strategy yet came down to just mashing the attack command over and over again, no sense of satisfaction whatsoever - an utter waste of time. I'm just happy not all games turned out to be like that, otherwise I might have skipped out on the entire genre all together.[/rant]

But really, if somebody could please explain to me what the point is to playing a game like Dawn of Souls FF1, I'd greatly appreciate it. I just don't get it at all, and it's driving me nuts. And it's not just FF1DoS, either.



Stuffgamer1 said:

@Adamant: Game-breaking or no, I really can't tolerate that kind of crap...certainly not when I CAN cast those spells in the PSP version...and I do so quite regularly, in fact, at least with Saber.

@Mickeymac: Hard to explain, but I just enjoy that kind of thing sometimes. I don't have the slightest clue why people enjoy fighting games (Street Fighter style), but they do. It really just boils down to personal taste.



CanisWolfred said:

I can say that I enjoy Fighting games because they require you to think on your feet - you have to react to what your opponent is doing, and tweak your strategy accordingly. I also like how they require a lot of practice in order to get good at them - it's so satisfying to see one's hard work and effort yield genuine results. Actually, that's also what I like about RPGs as well.

....you know, I had a 'eureka' moment a little while agor, but I procrastinated so much on this comment, I plum forgot what I was going to say. (it had something to do with understanding why people would like simple, easy RPGs like the DoS version of FF1 and Golden Sun. Think, Mac, think!! What was it?! It also had something to do with thinking the exact opposite of how I would, and an 'easy-going experience'...this could take a while.)



Stuffgamer1 said:

@Mickeymac: Everything you just said about "fighting games" is what I like about Super Smash Bros. But the same concepts in say, Street Fighter, don't work for me AT ALL. The controls, the feel...they just rub me the wrong way.

Any luck remembering what you were thinking about people liking easy RPG's? It sounds to me like you were going somewhere along the lines of people who simply aren't looking for a challenge in video games in general...which is a point of view I can respect, because I don't always want a game to be too hard either. It's good to feel like you totally pwned a game, even if it's only because the game was easy. Not TOO easy, though, or it'll still feel cheap...I feel that DoS and the PSP version of FFI get that balance just right...plus if you DO want a challenge, the PSP-exclusive dungeon is freaking HARD!



CanisWolfred said:


Yeah, the controls are half the battle in a fighting game. 'course, once you get used to them, they're a lot more fun.

I think you hot the nail on the head about the RPGs, although I was just figuring some people at least want their RPGs to be a more laidback experience, which I can vouch for on occasion.

However, it isn't just the difficulty that I didn't like about DoS FF1, it was the game as a whole. The NES version had a sense of charm and uniqueness to it - they just don't make games like that anymore. However, with all the "improvements" in the remakes, the game became a generic, Bog-standard experience that just made it feel like a lot of the other RPGs that came out at the time, and at the same time, it reminds me that most of those games were much better than it. I just don't see the point of wasting my precious time on such a forgettable game. I just can't see the appeal of it outside of a "my first RPG" experience.



Ryuuga said:

After reading the comments now I decided, FF will be my free NES game. I was a bit afraid to get it because of the patience you need, but it's nice to know that it's not necessary to do grinding if you use strategy, and that's just what I luv in table RPGs like Dungeons and Dragons or Gurps. So, Final Fantasy I, here I go!



billy_soy said:

Not that it's a big deal, but I disagree with the number score of this review. I understand Corbie's logic of rating the game from an "every-gamer" point-of-view, but I think that the written review rather than the numerical one should indicative of playability for gamers interested in purchasing this game. In my opinion, rating it low because some gamers might not be able to adjust to the differences between an NES game and a 2009 hot-of-the-press game is selling it short. Give it what it deserves. Give it what everyone knows it deserves: if the scene kids whine then no harm, no foul. Chalk it up to acculturation.



FATALITYocarina said:

Deserves a 9/10. My only gripe is that it requires a 60Hz resolution, so until I can get a TV that supports it, I have to play it in Black and White. I still enjoy it though. The game has incredibly basic visuals, yet the re-release needs a high resolution. The game will suck you in. I can say that after having it for 24 hours.



CaptainN said:

While this game does shows its age it is still really fun. I especially like the many different party combinations as it gives the game a huge amount of replayability that the RPGs of today lack. My only real complaint is that there is an incredibly large amount of game play glitches that, while not exactly game destroying, are annoying.



HanuKwanzMasBif said:

Downloaded this game, it's AWESOME. Tough though. The first time I played it I didn't realize that you could go into the buildings right next to the castle. I also made the stupid move of trying to go past that patch of grass surrounding the castle, because when I was right next to the building north of the starting area, I got attacked by dragon serpent things and got a Game Over. Had to start over completely.



Yadoking said:

A friend of mine really hates this game. Really hates it. But another of my pals just gifted me it for my birthday. I've never tried it so I'm hoping for the best. After reading this review, I feel as though I may enjoy it.



TheDreamingHawk said:

Getting it next time I get wii points. But I really wish the japanese version of FFII would come, I guess it'll be my first game to use my homemade Famicom converter!



_Octoling_ said:

This is my first final fantasy, and I'd give it a 8.5 at least. I didn't find much difficulty, and I generally stink at old video games. But then again, I thought Majoras Mask and Mega Man 5 were really difficult games, and Super Smash Bros Melee was honestly one of the easier games I've played.

Leave A Comment

Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...