Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Role Playing (Games) Cellphones Iphone Portables (Games) Games

Final Fantasy I and II Are Coming To the iPhone and iPod Touch 142

Posted by Soulskill
from the go-red-wings dept.
jonasvdc tips an announcement by Square Enix that Final Fantasy I and Final Fantasy II are being developed for the iPhone and the iPod touch. The graphics and UI have been modified to look and run better on the touchscreen devices, but everything from Cecil to the classic Black Mage is clearly recognizable. The announcement did not include any information on a price or release date.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Final Fantasy I and II Are Coming To the iPhone and iPod Touch

Comments Filter:
  • Um, Cecil? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Kufat (563166) <.kufat. .at. .kufat.net.> on Thursday January 21, 2010 @12:04PM (#30846772) Homepage

    Cecil isn't in any of the screenshots...because he isn't in either of the games mentioned. That's Final Fantasy IV, which has been known by that name in every release except for the US SNES version.

    I can see being confused by the renaming, but how do you see a character in the screenshots who just isn't there?

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Draek (916851)

      I believe the submitter got confused between Cecil and Kain (y'know, the good/bad/good/whatever guy from FFIV), and further confused the Dragoon in the screenshot with him, leading to his statement in TFS.

    • The dude at the top IS Cecil. It's him after becoming the Holy Knight. That is in fact Final Fantasy IV, which as you've already said was FF2 in the US.

      • by HunterZ (20035)

        Huh? That facebook/chillze picture clearly shows the characters from FF2j.

        • Oh... Well, he looked like Cecil to me too. I guess I didn't recognize them since I didn't play FF2j for more than 20 minutes (it was before there were ready translations.)

    • by _KiTA_ (241027)

      Cecil isn't in any of the screenshots...because he isn't in either of the games mentioned. That's Final Fantasy IV, which has been known by that name in every release except for the US SNES version.

      I can see being confused by the renaming, but how do you see a character in the screenshots who just isn't there?

      If you look at the first screenshot, Richard is dressed up almost the exact same as dark Knight Cecil. This is because Richard is also a dark knight -- of sorts. It's not an inexcusable mistake.

  • Are we talking about I and II, or I and IV?

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by hansamurai (907719)

      SquareEnix re-released Final Fantasy IV outside of Japan on the DS as Final Fantasy IV, so that's what they're calling that now.

      Cecil is not in Final Fantasy II (as the numbering scheme now goes) so he's not clearly seen.

  • Final Fantasy 1 was THE game that got me into the RPG genre, and solidified my Nintendo Fan-boi-ism for many,many years to come, but now having seen my favorite game ported to Sony PSP and now iPhone/iPod without seeing an NDS remake is just boiling my oil. and also to Square/Enix, don't forget about those of us who saved your now-wretched company back then when Final Fantasy was almost your swan-song, We'd like a way to play this game on a console with bloodlines to the original, without having to resort t
    • I think the issue is that you became a Nintendo Fan-boi and Square/Enix Didn't.

      Square used Nintendo to Breakout - but they by no means had any loyalty to remain with Nintendo. Once they saw the Play Station 2 they jumped on that ship. And when the 360 showed its strength they announced an FF game for that.

      And Nintendo, being Nintendo, went on with different projects like the DS, and the Wii. They are now on far opposite sides of the gaming spectrum (Casual vs Hardcore) and I don't see them working together

      • by MBGMorden (803437)

        And Nintendo, being Nintendo, went on with different projects like the DS, and the Wii. They are now on far opposite sides of the gaming spectrum (Casual vs Hardcore) and I don't see them working together again for a long time.

        I know! Heck if they'd have kept up the relationship we might have even gotten Final Fatasy games for the Gamecube [wikipedia.org] or maybe even the Wii [wikipedia.org]!

        MAYBE even a few games for the DS [ebgames.com]. But no, Square had to abandon working with Nintendo ;).

        • by ifrag (984323)

          I know! Heck if they'd have kept up the relationship we might have even gotten [Crystal Chronicles] games for the Gamecube or maybe even the Wii

          OK, technically yes there is a game that has the name "Final Fantasy" in the title, but those games hardly hold a candle compared to a real numbered title. The last Final Fantasy that most people care to acknowledge on Nintendo hardware would be VI. Even the newer Tactics seemed like toned down cheap imitation when compared to the original. Obviously Square/Enix

          • by PitaBred (632671)

            Given what they do with the numbered titles, there's just no way the Wii or any of the recent Nintendo hardware can handle it. They'd have to strip the hell out of it, and I don't blame Square/Enix for not wanting to.

        • Isn't Square Enix releasing a new version of FF for the Wii? Crystal Chronicles or something? I thought I saw an ad on TV the other day.
      • by wgoodman (1109297)

        At least get your facts straight!

        They switched from Nintendo once the PS came out. after FF7-9 came out on the PS, they made 10-12 on the PS2. 13 was originally developed for PS2, then moved over to PS3. Microsoft threw a huge thwaq of cash as Square to get them to delay FF13 and port it over to the 360. It is still coming out on PS3, and should have a much higher quality to it since they didn't have to compress the textures/movies as much to squeeze them onto several DVDs (the entire game is more or les

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by damien_kane (519267)

      We'd like a way to play this game on a console with bloodlines to the original, without having to resort to emulators to do so.

      FF I+II GBA Cart on a NDS or DS-Lite (just not the DSi where they took out the GBA slot)

  • So how long till it makes its way to Droid - if ever at all? I don't mind exclusive deals, but it'd be nice if they wore off after a few months.

    I personally never played any of the FF series, only because I hadn't heard of it until like 7 or 8 came out, and I thought I'd have a lot of backstory to catch up with (though people have reassured me that I really don't). So, if these become available at an affordable price on a device I already have - then I'd probably purchase.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by tepples (727027)

      I don't mind exclusive deals, but it'd be nice if they wore off after a few months.

      All exclusive deals wear off no later than 1,151 months.

      I personally never played any of the FF series, only because I hadn't heard of it until like 7 or 8 came out, and I thought I'd have a lot of backstory to catch up with (though people have reassured me that I really don't).

      Final Fantasy is a brand, not a series. With a few exceptions (e.g. Final Fantasy X and Final Fantasy X-2), each game has nothing to do with the last except being a role-playing video game made by Square.

      • by Pojut (1027544)

        each game has nothing to do with the last except being a role-playing video game made by Square.

        This is one of the big draws to the series...no prior experience with any of the games is necssary. In my own personal opinion, you are wasting your time if you play anything past VI (although X was decent...certainly the only post-VI Final Fantasy game I would recommend).

        For me, the series really jumped the shark when it went 3D. Not using sprites anymore really took some of the magic away.

        • It wasn't jumping the shark going 3d... It was necessary... If you are still using sprites your game will look old and out of date. Even when they went 3D the games were still based on the old method.

          • Re:Exclusive? (Score:5, Interesting)

            by Pojut (1027544) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @12:48PM (#30847414) Homepage

            I point you in the direction of Muramasa: The Demon Blade [wikipedia.org], which was released just a few months ago, uses sprites for all in-game characters/enemies, and is quite a beautiful game. Here are a couple screenshots:

            http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_NXLKQR2FNpY/SwitorQly1I/AAAAAAAAAGs/unJ2YjKwJ3M/s1600/muramasathedemonblade-3.jpg [blogspot.com]
            http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/2009/06/custom_1244093929468_Muramasa2.jpg [gawker.com]

            It looks even better in motion, I highly recommend you look up some videos of the game in action. Using sprites [wikipedia.org] doesn't necessarily mean it will look pixelated, it just means it isn't a fully rendered character. Considering the quality of 3D back in the PS1 days, it was a mistake to move the series to 3D then. I know that it would have eventually happened, I'm just questioning the timing of the move.

            • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

              by Chris Burke (6130)

              Considering the quality of 3D back in the PS1 days, it was a mistake to move the series to 3D then. I know that it would have eventually happened, I'm just questioning the timing of the move.

              Yeah I can see your point there. Games like Castlevania SotN showed what a 2D powerhouse the Playstation was, and a 2D FFVII would have been beautiful. Though some things like the change of perspective to look down the field of battle as Leviathan's gigantic tidal wave towering over the enemies that a moment ago tower

              • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

                by Pojut (1027544)

                The reason I pinpoint the series jumping the shark with VII is because that was when the games went from having complicated, mature, fully believable characters to whining brats. Placing the emphasis on technology while fantasy was placed in the backseat didn't help either.

                I suppose I should clarify...for me, the series jumped the shark and has just never been the same since it went 3D. The series going 3D isn't necessarily the cause of it (although it is a contributing factor), they both just happened to

                • I like the idea of technological levels in a game being different from the levels of fantasy. What I mean is that I don't think a fantasy game is required to be set in a medieval time. I always felt like the higher technology worked nicely in 7; the core of the series is still about life-force, magic, etc, it just has a different flavor with the addition of technological elements.
                  • by Pojut (1027544)

                    Oh I completely agree (no game did this better than Arcanum [wikipedia.org], in my opinion)...I just didn't like that the focus of the series shifted from fantasy with technology sprinkled in to technology with fantasy sprinkled in...it's not that it's bad, I just think the idea of fantasy with technology sprinkled in is much more interesting than vice versa.

                    I have no problem with the game taking place further in the future, it's just that the focus seems to be on the fact that the game takes place in the future, rather th

                • by Chris Burke (6130)

                  I always thought Cecil was a pretty whiny bastard, and that's not to mention the spoony bard. :)

                  Technology (and angst) played a big role in VI too.

                  But yeah, there were definitely thematic changes in VII and I can understand being put off by them.

                  • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

                    by Pojut (1027544)

                    I always thought Cecil was a pretty whiny bastard, and that's not to mention the spoony bard. :)

                    True, but that was the whole point of their characters. When the entire cast is like that though...

                    Technology (and angst) played a big role in VI too.

                    They certainly did, but the tone of the story focused on the fantasy elements. An example: technology was used on the Espers to exploit their abilities for Magitek, also a technology. The focus, however, was placed on the fact that the Espers were used, rather than why they were used and the results from it. An entire segment of the game takes place in a giant Magitek factory, yet we learn very little abou

                    • by Chris Burke (6130)

                      The focus, however, was placed on the fact that the Espers were used, rather than why they were used and the results from it. An entire segment of the game takes place in a giant Magitek factory, yet we learn very little about the actual process or the potential technology that can be built from it.

                      Sure you learned about what the result was -- Humans could learn magic, or you could make a mech or other machines with magic attacks. I mean of course they don't go into the process. Magic esper-eating tanks

                    • by Pojut (1027544)

                      I'm really trying to fit what you're saying with my memories of FFVI and FFVII to see what you mean. But all I'm really getting is that you like technology that is explicitly powered by magic, rather than technology that is merely indistinguishable from magic in a world where magic exists.

                      That's...not quite what I'm getting it. unfortunately, I don't really know how else to explain it other than prior to VII, technology was a part of the story but not something that had the camera pointed on it just for the sake of showing off technology. ::shrug:: not really sure how else to say it.

                      Meh. I haven't played any past VII, since my access to non-Nintendo consoles was based entirely on an old college roommate. So I'm just looking at VII. I can obviously see that there's more technology present in VII, but I don't get what you mean by "focus".

                      VII and the games that followed seemed to wallow in the technology present, as if the game was using the player's eyes to take them for a swim through electronics and advancement. Prior to VII, technology was s

                    • by Pojut (1027544)

                      Prior to VII, technology was something that was present, but didn't seem to be as in your face as it was in later games.

                      To expand on this...

                      The technology aspect was present, but it was present in a passive way. There wasn't specific attention that was brought to it...rather, it was just something that happened to make up a part of the experience. It wasn't something that stood front and center, it was just sorta there.

                    • by Chris Burke (6130)

                      That's...not quite what I'm getting it. unfortunately, I don't really know how else to explain it other than prior to VII, technology was a part of the story but not something that had the camera pointed on it just for the sake of showing off technology. ::shrug:: not really sure how else to say it.

                      Except for all the time that it was like I was referring to, like the lengthy sequence with Edgar's castle going under the sand for the first time, or the unveiling of the airships. Or when you'd fight a purely

                    • by Pojut (1027544)

                      I can definitely see that there's more technology in VII, but to me it's nothing but a slight shift in the magic/tech mix that already existed. The main thing that gave me that impression playing the games was that you start in Midgar, the tech city, rather than visiting it later like the Empire in VI. All the key story elements -- Mako energy, the Lifestream, Sephiroth summoning Meteor -- are magic all the way. *shrug* Maybe it crossed some line for you, but for me, VII is still stuffed with magic to satisfy my fantasy desires.

                      Honestly, I think it all comes down to the overall presentation differences. If that is the case, I don't think it's nostalgia...I think having the technology aspect with modern visuals just puts more of an exclamation point on it compared to high-tech stuff done up in pixelated sprite form. ::shrug:: who knows. "Science is a mystery to man, isn't it Frylock?" -Meatwad

              • by drinkypoo (153816)

                I thought FFVII was beautiful. If you look at it today it looks dated as all hell, but back then it was the second-most visually stunning RPG, after Panzer Dragoon Saga. And who has even played that? Not so many of us.

                • by Chris Burke (6130)

                  Oh it was beautiful alright. Not argument there. But even at the time the 3D seemed primitive and was probably the weakest part of the appearance compared to the gorgeously rendered 2D backgrounds. Not that it looked bad, the kinda blocky style had a charm to it. And the 3D was used to great effect for the Summons. Too bad they were so excited about their cut scenes they decided to make it impossible to skip them. :P

        • Ok, I don't know where the rest of you guys are coming in, but everyone I know was in awe with how good the graphics for FFVII were at the time. I mean come on, this was 1997, 13 years ago. Of course going back we notice that they have bricks for hands and feet, but that was the first game I remember that had FMV and multiple camera angles during summons.

          I enjoyed FFVII and FFX. FFX-2 was too girly and FFXII had a boring plot, although a cool world.

          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            by Pojut (1027544)

            Ok, I don't know where the rest of you guys are coming in, but everyone I know was in awe with how good the graphics for FFVII were at the time. I mean come on, this was 1997, 13 years ago.

            Feh...maybe console-only gamers were in awe. It didn't really do that much for me or other pc & console gamers. Yes, it was 1997, but also remember the visual difference between console gaming and PC gaming was WAAAAAY bigger than it is now. (For reference, I'm 26 and started playing games on a Commodore 64 when i was four years old.)

            but that was the first game I remember that had FMV and multiple camera angles during summons.

            If you mean FMV in a Final Fantasy game, then ignore this last part of my post....

            Final Fantasy VII was the first game you noticed that had FMV?

            http://en.wikipedia.org/w [wikipedia.org]

          • by wgoodman (1109297)

            Back then Tifa was HOT!

    • People assure you that there's not backstory to catch up on because the games are entirely unrelated from each other. Except for FFX-2 and FFXII Revenant Wings, the main series has no direct sequels.

      Square is starting to go back to the world of Ivalice more, but FFXII is the only main series game that takes place there.

      • by Pojut (1027544)

        Just wanted to say I love the concept of your site. Good stuff.

      • Except for FFX-2 and FFXII Revenant Wings, the main series has no direct sequels.

        You missed one.

        A direct sequel to FF IV [wikipedia.org] albeit in episodic form.

        It was surprisingly faithful, too, other than that controller-chucking stupidity that is the moon phases.

    • NESoid (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Daetrin (576516) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @12:37PM (#30847230)
      "So how long till it makes its way to Droid - if ever at all?"

      I assume you mean aside from playing it through NESoid? [nesoid.com] I'm currently in the middle of a game of Nobunaga's Ambition on my Nexus One. (I might have started up a game of FF1 instead, except i was already playing that on the Wii Virtual Console =) Even if you want to be entirely ethical (since you apparently don't already have an old copy lying around) i personally wouldn't feel any qualms about buying a copy for some other system (even an old used copy) and then d/ling the rom.

      "I personally never played any of the FF series, only because I hadn't heard of it until like 7 or 8 came out, and I thought I'd have a lot of backstory to catch up with (though people have reassured me that I really don't)."

      I wouldn't suggest playing FF1 for the first time now unless you're already very familiar with how clunky those old NES games could get. FF1, along with Dragon Quest 1, were both exploring how to do RPGs on the console format, and there's a lot of UI issues that got resolved in later versions. (In particular, having to buy each item one at a time, no descriptions for any items, no way to view stats without equipping an item and switching to the status screen.) And even aside from the difficulties the UI imposes it's probably the most challenging game in the FF series. (It's hard to say if the fact that attacks targeted on enemies that die before that character's turn don't get re-targeted to another enemy is a UI bug or just an unneeded increase to the difficulty, but in either case they got rid of it in later games.)

      I still think it's a great game despite all that, but i admit that i come pre-equipped with a pair of rose-tinted glasses which you would be lacking :)
      • by Deosyne (92713)

        Yeah, NESoid and SNESoid are awesome, but I wouldn't mind if they released these updated versions to run natively in Android as well.

    • by Darinbob (1142669)
      Get in line. People are still waiting for it to get to a PC...
  • Higher res and more colors doesn't always mean better. I'd still rather play the NES original on an emulator.

    • Re:Looks better? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Chris Burke (6130) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @12:39PM (#30847284) Homepage

      It doesn't always mean better when graphics are a substitute for gameplay, but the exact same FF gameplay with updated graphics? Yes that's better! It's not like the original developers went with a 16-color palette and pixelated graphics as a stylistic choice. They made it as pretty as they could, and did a good job, but would they rather have had SNES graphics capabilities or more? Do the screenshots look like what they would have gone for, had they been able? Yes and yes.

      Other games that were better after a graphical update include Kings Quest I and Heroes Quest (I mean Quest for Glory) when they were updated for VGA from EGA. Super Mario Brothers was improved by its release as part of Super Mario All Stars. Quake was vastly improved by the switch to OpenGL (oh god and how!), and today open-source mods improve it further just by adding shader effects. Star Control II is improved in its Ur Quan Masters form by the simple expedient of anti-aliasing the rotated sprites.

      In summary: Same game play, with better graphics that are in the same spirit as the original? Yes please!

      • by Hatta (162192)

        I dunno. There's something classic about the NES look. Maybe it's just nostalgia. I was never a big fan of the VGA re-releases Sierra did either, but that's just because I like the parser. But there's something to be said about inspiration coming from limitations. Would Mario look the same if Miyamoto had a full 640x480 to work with? I don't think so. In this case here, I think the original FF1 characters have a lot more, um, character than the rather generic art of the remake.

        • by Chris Burke (6130)

          I dunno. There's something classic about the NES look. Maybe it's just nostalgia.

          Probably.

          I was never a big fan of the VGA re-releases Sierra did either, but that's just because I like the parser.

          Yeah that's true I didn't like the icon based interface myself. I forgot the remakes switched to it.

          But there's something to be said about inspiration coming from limitations. Would Mario look the same if Miyamoto had a full 640x480 to work with?

          Technically no, since Mario was given a moustache because they coul

          • p>

            Lich looks like what I always wished Lich looked like, rather than a skeleton emerging from some cloud of pink goo? That's I guess is supposed to be robes?

            I guess back in the day we had imaginations...

            Get off my lawn, graphic-whore! And light another torch.

            Who would get him first, I wonder, the grue or the wumpus?

            • by Chris Burke (6130)

              Well that's the point, isn't it? I had to use my imagination to make Lich look scary, but the artwork that was present, limited by NES capabilities, wasn't helping. Was I supposed to imagine that Lich was like a skeleton-genie in a swirling cloud of fuchsia gas? Or that Lich was taking a page from Jesse Ventura's book and wearing an expansive feather boa? I mean far be it from me to give an ancient undead wizard fashion advice, but a bare chest and a pink boa is a hard look to pull off. Points for bold

              • I always thought it was obvious that they were robes. I guess your imagination leans more towards flamboyantly-colored smokes...

                • by Chris Burke (6130)

                  My imagination can only do so much with fuchsia. :)

                  But as far as using your imagination goes, to this day nothing terrifies me more than a simple, lower case letter 'l'. 'Cept maybe certain 'c's or 'h's. :)

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Enderandrew (866215)

      I believe the GBA version of FFI also had 4 new lengthy bonus dungeons. I assume this content might also go into the iPhone versions.

      Square has also done updated cut-scenes for many of their remakes.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by antifoidulus (807088)
      The remakes are also MUCH easier than the original. Some of them even go so far as to get rid of the x # of magic points per level and go with the now-standard "each spell costs x mp" system. Some also modify combat so that if you assign your character to attack an enemy that is now dead they will attack another enemy instead of just attacking the air. They also toned down the difficulty level in general, I played a few of the remakes and I don't think I can recall getting a game over once. For starters
      • by jandrese (485)
        Did you play the original in the Japanese? Apparently the US version was toned down a bit from the Japanese version because apparently Americans prefer their games to be fun. I played through 1 a few years ago and it was tough, but if you did a bit of grinding in the north before diving into the dungeon it wasn't too terrible. OTOH, I wouldn't mind if they updated it so the racial traits on the weapons actually worked.
        • No I played the North American version, the difficulty of the game was pretty random. If you got unlucky even a fully leveled up group can go down to a group of 9 undead as you get to just sit there and watch as your 500+ hp fighters go down. But yeah, I do wish they would update the original so that the racial traits of the weapons would actually work. That would make leveling up vs. giants in the earth fiends lair infinitely easier.
  • by Pojut (1027544) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @12:11PM (#30846866) Homepage

    These seems like as good a time as any to ask...is the iPod Touch worth buying just for games available on the platform? It seems like there are a ton of cool games out there for it, but I don't really want to plunk down the cash if it isn't worth it from a gaming point of view...

    Opinions?

    • by Pojut (1027544)

      Thanks to everyone who answered...I already have a Game Gear, GBA, DS, and a PSP, was just curious if the Touch was worth adding to the portable gaming collection. Sounds like it isn't.

      Thanks again, all!

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by XxtraLarGe (551297)

      is the iPod Touch worth buying just for games available on the platform?

      I wouldn't say it's worth buying as a gaming platform alone, but it is definitely an added incentive. In my opinion, an iPod Touch is worth buying since it's a music player, web browser, email client, address book, calendar, calculator, note pad, photo album AND you can play lots of cool games. I've sold my DS since I got my iPod touch, because several of the games I owned on the DS are available on the iPod Touch for a fraction of the price. For instance, there's Civilization Revolution [tr.im] for $6.99 or Puzzle [tr.im]

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by brkello (642429)
      I enjoy my iPod touch for gaming. The only drawback is it has very very poor battery life. Other than that, I have found a lot of fun games to play on it. Catan and GeoDefense are good for hours and hours of fun alone.
  • Epidemic (Score:2, Funny)

    This will surely cause an epidemic of people's legs falling asleep as they have a much more in depth game to play on the toilet at work.
  • Now look, I understand that Square Enix republishing games for new platforms is both financially savvy and also a boon for those of us that may have lost our old games, but really? FF1 has been published for no less than 3 platforms already (NES, GBA, PS-nevermind emulators), and I still have copies 2 of them (NES and GBA, though to be fair the GBA version was to get the first official US version of FF2).

    I have nothing against exploiting existing intellectual property if it'll make you money, especially wh

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Chris Burke (6130)

      I still have the NES cartridge and a working NES (though without fixing the connector issue by one of various means it's a pain in the ass to use and thus it sits collecting dust). Not everyone who played FF on the NES can say that. I don't have a GBA or a PS, and the later is probably less likely to still work than most people's NES (the curse of optical drives).

      Then again I don't have an iPhone either.

      But if I did, would I be more likely to play FF on it than to bust out the NES? Yeah. Would I pay for

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by WilyCoder (736280)

      I feel sorry for you, lugging that NES around on mass transit. I bet you piss off your fellow passengers with that generator as well.

  • Boy Apple is behind the times. I've had them on my Droid for months.
  • by LSU_ADT_Geek (580524) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @01:16PM (#30847880)
    • 1987 - Final Fantasy 1 (NES)
    • 1988 - Final Fantasy 2 (NES)
    • 1989 - Final Fantasy 1 (MSX2)
    • 2000 - Final Fantasy 1 (WSC)
    • 2001 - Final Fantasy 2 (WSC)
    • 2004 - Final Fantasy 1 + 2 (GBA)
    • 2007 - Final Fantasy 1 (PSP)
    • 2007 - Final Fantasy 2 (PSP)

    The sad part is that I have been alive for all of these and have purchased over 50% of them!

    Source: Final Fantasy Release Info [ffcompendium.com]

    • The GBA version is the best in my opinion!

    • by bziman (223162)

      How is that sad? When someone says Final Fantasy, I can only assume they mean the original NES version from 1987, which I bought then, and still play now. I'm afraid I never upgraded to any of these newer fancy-pants systems. I miss the class NES games, and I wish they'd make new games with new stories with the original engine and style of game play. Newer games are too busy and their graphics just give me a headache.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by aaaantoine (1540357)
      You missed "Final Fantasy Origins", released on the PlayStation in 2003.
    • by Eil (82413)

      You forgot:

      • 2002 - Final Fantasy 1 + 2 (PSX)
      • 2009 - Final Fantasy 1 + 2 (Wii)
  • Yet another port of a game I've already purchased 3 times! And for a system I don't own/can't afford! And the greatest foreseeable benefit? Now I can fat-finger my way to accidentally using my last megalixir instead of the Hi-Potion 2 items up in the item list! The joy!

    that said, I'll probably still end up buying this version, too :(

"Look! There! Evil!.. pure and simple, total evil from the Eighth Dimension!" -- Buckaroo Banzai

Working...