OP
OP
Right? Man, that Wonderswan pic... it really would have been a cohesive trilogy.
Add some kind of VI port that isn't a hot mess and I think that'd be just about all of em, eh?
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Final Fantasy III: Which version do you prefer? (Additional inquiries inside.)
- Thread starter styl_oh
- Start date
Add some kind of VI port that isn't a hot mess and I think that'd be just about all of em, eh?
GBA version of VI with sound and color restoration is the way to go. I'm sure most folks run that setup on their PCs, but I have an actual cartridge that does the trick.
I sure would love to live in a world again where Square Enix sees the value of releasing VI (and V) on consoles alongside VII and up.
OP
OP
I'm no audophile but it sounds good on my PSP. That could also be the effect of switching from a PS1 game to a PSP game... and it's also cool to compare the new arrangements to the originals in the menu. In that sense it's a very cool port; Uematsu willing to go back and re-record songs... well, clearly a lot of work went into the whole thing, music or no.
Thinking on it, whether a person likes the new style or not, it's gotta be one of the better Square remasters, in that they didn't just slap some broken code around with a blur filter or break even more things.
For sure. FFIII may be my least favorite mainline entry in the series (not entirely certain... but it's likely) but I've got a lot of respect for the talent that was poured into that remaster. It's a good package.
OP
OP
Oh yeah that's right. It's just insane the hoops you have to jump through to play that game with a working evade mechanic, the latest localization, decent graphics 'n sound and no load times
And even then those carts are getting kinda shy, guess I'm lucky to have V (which I may play after III...oh shit, that'll be the only 2D one I haven't played then. Not that the III I'm playing is 2D.)
Enjoy FFV. I'll look forward to your thoughts on that one. Whenever I think of III, one of the first things my brain does is remind me that V is what I'd rather be playing. It takes what I enjoy about III and goes bananas with it in all the right ways.
OP
OP
Ah, I can't wait then! Maybe it's better I play III first... though I did like 1+2 to varying extents. So far III is a lot more like I, DnD/Vancian casting and so on.
This is my first real experience with JRPG job systems and I think I like them... actually that was probably Dragon Quest 3, god what a game... anyway, let you know if and when I get to FFV!
If we could get III, V, and VI in the same style as the I, II, & IV 2D PSP versions, with all six available on modern consoles/PC, that would be heaven.
If possible, I would recommend playing both.
I prefer the NES/Famicom's gameplay while the characters/story imo is a bit better in the remake.
The original you played as 4 orphans (who you start out with all 4) who begin the game out as Onion Knights - you name each one cause they dont have a canon name.
The remake has 4 unique characters which you get at different times and Onion Knight is like a end game class/job rather than a default starting job like in the NES/Famicom.
The originals do feel like DQ because FF and DQ were pretty similar in designs back then which is probably why you feel FF3 is like a DQ game.
It's also worth noting that the games also change when you get the actual job system unlocked. The Famicom version unlocks them as soon as you get out of the cave at the very beginning of the game, while the remake makes you wait until after Djinn's cave. This is also why you don't start as Onion Knights, since they had to come up with new start classes for the characters that were more generalized to compensate for how you'd otherwise have no access to magic or certain weapons that were critical for Djinn's cave.
OP
OP
If I could pick your collective brains for a second... from what I can see, the characters are utter blank slates, yeah? Not even with the tiny little advantages the party of II had.
So... I think I heard something about swapping around spells. If I, like, change my mind on who I gave Poisona or whatever to, can I somehow give it to someone else. Maybe I read it wrong. I'm just not sure what my plan is yet in these early days... I can't recall their names but Leth is leaning towards a duel-wielding tank, Riffia maybe a black mage, Igno currently has a bow... which I guess leaves Arc to be the white mage type, maybe. I dunno.
I mean I haven't even encountered actual jobs besides Freelancer so I figure nothing is super nailed in stone yet.
P.S. Should I sell a lot of stuff? I've found that in every FF from 4-onward, nothing is worth anything, but in the early games things have value. I sold sooooo much stuff in 2, so I'm wondering.
There's not much difference between the characters as Freelancers.
Yes, you can swap around spells.
You'll get the first set of jobs soon. There's tons of options and you can choose to make who whatever you want them to be.
My ideal party for FF1 and FF3 are...
Tank/Frontline fighter
White Mage/healer
Black Mage/Magic DPS
High atk fighter/frontline fighter
As for items, I've only sold old/weak equipment once I get better ones - never sell consumables, game is pretty easy but I would hold on to them. The final dungeon is really annoying lol.
Gil is easy to make since you get them from fights.
Edit: Also some boss fights, its recommended to use certain jobs like for an example I used 3 ninjas and 1 white mage for one specific boss fight cause it was better to use 3 ninjas and having only one healer lol.
The best version of it is skipping it altogether. It's really a not very good game requiring you to resort to guides to be able to know where to go and what to do. It's tied with 2 and XV as being the worst games in the series.
OP
OP
Gotcha... my FFI party was a Fighter/Knight, Red Wizard, Monk/Master, White Mage and that worked out pretty well. Maybe I'll try to recreate it, unless you reckon a Red Mage isn't such a hot idea here.
I think it's down there in terms of how it's not particularly great and really suffers from how FF5 basically does everything 3 does but better. That said, I don't think it's *bad* in any sense of the word. It does what it sets out to do and is competent in what it does. As far as RPGs of that era go, it's...fine.
You can use a Red mage, its fine though just be aware the high end/ultimate spells, some of them might not be usable by Red Mage and are exclusive to the Black mage and white mage...though....there's a better class that is imo better than all three mages you will get.
Unlike FF1, at least you can change the job if you dont like the Red Mage.
I never pick Red Mage in FF1 because it was locked out of some of the most powerful spells.
The other big thing to keep in mind with FF3 is that, unlike later games with the class system, you do have to eventually change your classes and some party strategies aren't available at certain points in the game due to how the game restricts what weapons and spells classes are able to down to the specific weapons and spells (rather than weapon types and spell class/level). Once you get past a certain point, you basically have to stop using red mages and there's nothing else that is really like it for the rest of the game (there are other fighting/magic hybrids, but not as general as the red mage and you still have to abandon them by end game due to how they can't equip a lot of late game gear/spells). By the time you get to the end game, your only real class options are either pure magic (though they can use both) or pure fighting.
Another interesting note about III NES.
Shops tend to not carry new gear for old jobs.
You pretty much have to switch to new jobs whenever they become available, or be stuck with obsolete gear.
Shops tend to not carry new gear for old jobs.
You pretty much have to switch to new jobs whenever they become available, or be stuck with obsolete gear.
Yeah it is fine. Something like ff13 is a bad game, ff3 was just boring at worst.
4 really started the idea of telling an exciting story along the way and that of course only got better (for a few more games...)
So there isn't much to say about 3 except that it is what it is, it is dreadfully average and you can do better.
2's really more responsible for that. 4 just refined it like how 5 refined what 3 did (of course, the difference here is that FF5 took and improved on everything from 3, while 4 just took 2's storytelling but did a more standard game around it)
i also think FF2 starts with interesting story development, and has an extremely mature dark/melancholic vibe, something that only ff6 would bring back to the table again.
The Famicom version is better, it's a much better showing of how much of an impressive title it actually is for the system it's on. Its music is also more powerful despite being on weaker hardware.
The remake is better for replays though as it does some reworks to make more classes viable in lategame.
The remake is better for replays though as it does some reworks to make more classes viable in lategame.
Ah ah I was going to make the same jokeGameplay-wise? PSP/Steam by far.
Artstyle-wise? Famicom. I don't like the weird 3D chibiish look of FF3.
However, where is the Wonderswan option? It has the best look imo
Wish they released a version like that... š¢
I wish it came out