Talk:Final Fantasy VII

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Final Fantasy VII article.
Article policies
This is not a forum for general discussion of Final Fantasy VII.
Any such messages will be deleted. Please limit discussion to improvement of the article.
Former featured article Final Fantasy VII is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Featured topic star Final Fantasy VII is part of the "Final Fantasy titles" series (project page), a featured topic identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on March 20, 2007.
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
To-do list for Final Fantasy VII: edit · history · watch · refresh
  • Rewrite Setting section (moving some of its content into its Gaia (Final Fantasy VII) main article).
  • Rewrite Story section (too long).
  • Update Development section with the recently revealed information about the original plot draft written by Sakaguchi.[1]
  • Address FAR complaints.
  • Re-nominate for GA or FA status.
Priority 1 (top) 
Peer review This Everydaylife article has been selected for Version 0.5 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia. It has been rated B-Class on the assessment scale (comments).
Maintained The following user(s) are actively contributing to this article and may be able to help with questions about verification and sources:
Deckiller (talk) — Axem Titanium (talk) — Sjones23 (talk)
This in no way implies article ownership; all editors are encouraged to contribute.
Archive
Archives


Contents

[edit] Hot Blooded Detective Joe

IGN has some nifty new information about Final Fantasy VII's original plot draft as written by Sakaguchi. There are details about how the development team members refined the draft and how it evolved. It's really interesting and should added to the article.[2]. Kariteh 09:58, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

bump. Kariteh 07:31, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Bump again. I'll see if I can work on this article this week. Axem Titanium 20:25, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Split the story sections from the rest of the articles (to end this spoiler thing).

Let me first say that the whole spoilers bullshit is really getting out of hand, and now it's becoming more of bragging rights rather than just we have rules here we would like to follow. This needs to really stop, because I think the people that want SOME type of policing of what exactly is put in said article have more valid points here, thereby saying that something should be done. But the people that run this thing are trying their hardest to say that they don't need them, and going to cheap shots to do it. This needs to be controlled, though it is not, and it is the main thing that is dragging down this project (seriously, I was half-tempted to go to a higher up on Wiki to see what I could do about all this atrocity, but decided to just say what I thought could be done). People that are debating need to learn that it's not the end of the world if someone adds a tag. These tags are not such a big deal as, say, the resources thing, which I agree with, or the big one for me, the cleanup thing. Basically, this is become more of a "how much further can we slap those poor fanboys in the face and then laugh when their favorite game is ruined for them since we have our rules to hide under" rather than a serious discussion on the usage of the tags in question (and if I didn't know any better, I could swear that some of these descriptions for the stories were written as if the people writing them made it a POINT to spoil EVERYTHING in the game as a weapon. The Aries picture is the firm example because...THAT WAS THE ABSOLUTE ONLY PICTURE THAT ONE COULD USE TO DESCRIBE THAT SCENE?! And why are there no other pics in that particular story section?).

Now I said this here in brief, but I'm going with more detail here.

Now, on the basis on what provides AS a spoiler warning, both sides have valid points. A section called "Plot" could be a precursor that there MAY be spoilers and just be cautious. That could be more than enough in many cases. However, it could also mean the plot as it is said on the back of a DVD box or game book or whatever. The actual spoiler warning means that the article DOES contain spoilers somewhere in the article, and thus people have been warned beforehand. But it doesn't really say what part(s) of the summary has said spoiler(s), so if you already saw said spoiler, that may be the only reason that it had the warning in there, and so you're in the clear. This part has valid points coming from BOTH sides (even though I can see we're getting nasty with how we're expressing them).

Now HERE'S where the spoiler-tag-shippers win. In the FF articles, in the Plot section, in each subsection, there is a link before each section that leads you to the main article. As in, the main FF5 article would have a brief summary about the actual types of characters being used and how they were used game wise or whatever. But if one were to click on said main article that went into the character descriptions, they would be saying that they CHOOSE to be spoiled and they know what they are getting themselves into. This is true of all the subsections of "Plot"....EXCEPT the "Story" subsection, which actually drags out, on the main page, the ENTIRE story, beginning to end, all plot twists, etc. Not only does this give NO option for reader to go further (one must page down or drag the bar down or whatever to skip the story section or to use the anchor tags and then scroll up before realizing that the story section is even THERE, in the event that one came to this page for something in particular), it also is inconsistent with the rest of the article (why are the characters in their own section but we have to sift through the ENTIRE story part of the Plot section to get to the next part of the article). Plus, all those descriptions make the article rather long and tedious to get though.

Now, MY view is to actually do with the story sections what has been done with the other sections in Plot, and that is to split the story of each game into its own separate article. First provide a link TO the story of FF# article, and then a summary of what the main storyline in the game deals with (maybe a short summary of what the booklets say or some insight into how Square came up with the story for each game or something). Then, the story article would be able to provide the complete story, beginning to end, with no tags needed because, frankly, one CHOSE to click the link and thus become the victim of their own choice. You eliminate all the other issues I highlighted here.

Or you can ignore me and this spoiler BS will go on and on and on and on. Darkpower 11:45, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

I think the only obvious reason why the Story section cannot be split from the main article is that any article created within Wikipedia must have encyclopedic information on it. Characters articles can be created because they had development information and reviews to serve as out-of-universe context. Story "Articles" won't last long as it maintains in-universe information frowned upon in Wikipedia. — Bluerで す。 12:06, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Then why would the story article even be included within THIS article if it didn't have such in it? I don't know if you realized it, but you've just said that the story OF the game shouldn't even be IN the article, much less have any tags or have as many twists revealed as it does.
And plus, a separate article can contain additional content into the storyline or reception of said storyline. I think its quite logical, actually. You can have acceptable content on both pages in order to say that this is a viable discussion of what should be done about this. If for nothing else, to stop this discussion from polluting the rest of the project.Darkpower 12:13, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
You've misinterpreted what I say :) Story "Articles", not Story "section". Story subsection should exist as part of the Plot section of the article to give readers knowledge on the subject. As for the review of the story, it is written as part of the Reception section, so another review in the Reception "section" of a Story "Article" will be made redundant, thus deleted. This will weaken the Story Article. Additional content will be deemed "trivia", another frowned-upon element. — Bluerで す。 12:26, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Darkpower, please go read the Wikipedia:Spoiler and Wikipedia:Content disclaimer pages before trying to do anything here. There are guidelines. The fictional articles requires a plot section, and the guidelines mentioned that these sections does not need a spoiler tag. Everything ends here, there are no grounds for a spoiler tag in the plot section. It is just redundent and silly to add a spoiler tag to a plot section. Spoiler warnings are redundant when used in "Plot", "Character history", "Synopsis", or other sections that are self-evidently going to discuss a plot or similar. and Deleting relevant and significant, neutral and verifiable information about a narrative work from an article about that work "because it's a spoiler". is not an acceptable alternative. No, we are not hiding behind the policies, it is just them over-reacting over spoilers that they should just shut up and read the Wikipedia:Content disclaimer before reading the article and use common sense that plot sections will contain spoilers. Yes, a little tag is not a big deal, so is the large section title labelled Plot. Why have duplicate information in an article if it is not necessary? MythSearchertalk 13:00, 7 June 2007 (UTC)


just dont go to wikipedia to read about the extra stuff in something, until you are done reading, watching, playing. whatever it is you are worried about spoiling. comom every damn article in wikipedia that is about some damn story has the same argument. dont research somthing until you are done with the basics. Plus Aeris dieng. everyone in the world who has picked up a gaming magizine knows about that. it is the most famous cutscene in Gaming History! if you want to complain put it on my discussion page.(Masterxak) —The preceding signed but undated comment was added at 08:42, August 25, 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Development Copy

I managed to get a development copy of this game from around January of 1996 this week, and it should arrive by tomorrow (6/16) or Monday (6/18). The disc is officially called Square's Preview Extra, and according to the disc case, it contains a Final Fantasy VII Sample as well as the Siggraph '95 Works (the Final Fantasy SGI materials). According to the person who sold me this, this is supposedly the earliest demo/development disc available for FF7 and is extremely rare, especially in the condition that I bought it in. Here are some pictures of what I bought:

Image:Auction ff7demo 01.jpg

Image:Auction ff7demo 02.jpg

--Brahman 17:20, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but while it's interesting and all, I've removed your speculations about Aeris and Tifa. Remember that it's just a demo, and it's very frequent for demo to feature things that aren't canonical but are there just for the players to have a look at how the game plays. Maybe Aeris is in the party in this demo because Square wanted us to play with 3 party members even though that doesn't happen so early in the normal storyline. This wouldn't be the last time they did that: in the Xenogears demo, in which Bart and Elly join Fei at Citan's Mountain and say something like this in English (I'm going from memory here):
  • Bart: "Fei! How's it going? we'll join you for a while if you don't mind!"
  • Elly: "Hey!! That's not in the script!"
  • Bart: "Who cares? it's just a demo!"
And same thing for the Chrono Cross demo, in which Kid and Glenn joins Serge at Opassa Beach at the beginning of the game even though it makes no sense in the storyline (they say something, but it's in Japanese). Kariteh 07:21, 28 July 2007 (UTC)


In Electronic Gaming Monthly their was an interview, (it was the special Final Fantasy edition, cant remeber the date sorry, but if you can tell me that will really help) the producer said, the original story only had Cloud, Barret, and Tifa. Honestly. I will go look for a link to this interview. until then, (Masterxak 08:55, 25 August 2007 (UTC))

That would be great, thanks! Axem Titanium 03:28, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Story rewrite

I was considering a rewrite on the story section. I agree that it is too long. What should I do to edit this page? Also should this following hidden message be added?

This section has been edited to comply with the featured article criteria. Please do not add any unnecessary information. If you do wish to add detail on certain events, please discuss the additions on the talk page first or direct the detail to any article that it pertains to the topic at hand. For example, if you wish to add detail on Aerith Gainsborough's death, go to the Aerith Gainsborough article and add your information there. Any unneeded info added to this plot will quickly reverted, including any addition of spoiler tags. This plot is meant to be as comprehensive as possible, while only containing the details needed to understand plot at its most basic level.

I think the story section needs a lot of rewriting. Are there any suggestions? Sjones23 21:56, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

The phrasing of this hidden paragraph is being discussed here. --ΔαίδαλοςΣ 22:01, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

As what Deckiller said in the talk page for FFXII, this story section "needs to be reduced by half; editing should emphasize compressing information in fewer words, removing excess information, removing redundancies, and OR/Fancruft. References from the script are also in order." Is that any good ideas? Sjones23 22:21, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

it is too long, but it's also a very long story line and very difficult to condense. there is already a great deal of information being left out... Kiran90 16:26, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

The story still isn't as long as, say, the other PlayStation Final Fantasies or Xenosaga. It's possible. — Deckiller 16:35, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

yeh, im working on a re-write. i'll be done soon and post it up, you guys can touch it up for me.... or completly re-write it, depending on its shittyness... :P Kiran90 09:14, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

ok, the re-write is done. i've cut it back about 700 words but that's as much as i can do. it is without links or anything, but i still maintain it's better than the current version. i'll post it up and wait a week to see if it should be edited and kept, or reverted. Kiran 14:26, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I haven't the opportunity to read it thoroughly, but it clearly needs all the citations and notes as per the other Story sections of other FF articles. It also has glaring grammar and spelling mistakes. — Blue。 17:25, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Also, caution, you accidentally removed a picture from the section. I've restored it. Kariteh 17:58, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
ah, thanks. yeh, i knew about the lack of links and footnotes, etc. it'll take a bit of work. but in general the re-write is acceptable? Kiran 09:44, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
The story section needs to be reduced by half; editing should emphasize compressing information in fewer words, removing excess information, removing redundancies, and Original Research/Fancruft. References from the script are also in order. You forgot to add script references. This is needed, as with all FF articles (i.e. FFVI, FFIV, FFX, FFXII) Greg Jones II 12:55, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Yes, you already said this right above and word for word. The section needs to be reduced by half only once, not twice. That would be reducing it by what, 75 per cent? :/ Kariteh 13:04, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
I think reducing it by 75% is not enough. Greg Jones II 04:38, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Try to model it after the Final Fantasy VIII synopsis, which has basically become the ideal model for plot summaries. — Deckiller 18:20, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

it's all well and good to want to reduce it by that much, but look at the length of the story, it is incredibly difficult to condense such a detailed plot. if the readers want a general idea of the game, they'll look at the overview at the top of the page. if they want a reasonably detailed plot summary, they can read this. i really dont think there is any more that can be cut out.Kiran 00:42, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree. Reducing it by more than 75% is physically impossible. Kariteh 08:23, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Jesus Christ, Ryu_Kaze would be shocked by this. Reducing that summary in half would violate the Comprehensive criterion of featured articles. I'd rather have that ugly tag in perpetuity than actually execute its complaint. No one had better touch Chrono Cross, as removing information will compromise readers' ability to understand its byzantine plot. What's with this stupid plot summary paranoia rampant on VG articles? FF7's was trimmed enough in the FAC process. This is micromanaging overkill. ZeaLitY 19:51, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Square/soft

was it originally called Square, or Squaresoft? Kiran90 09:55, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

It is Squaresoft on its logo. MythSearchertalk 10:05, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
SquareSoft was a brand name used by the company. SquareSoft, Inc. was the name of the official North American subsidiary. The name of the company was Square Co., Ltd. See Square Co.#Subsidiaries and related corporations. --OnoremDil 10:10, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

i see. so would it be correct to refer to it as Square or Squaresoft in the opening paragraph: Final Fantasy VII (is a console and computer role-playing game developed and published by Square one would think Squaresoft Kiran 15:00, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

ok, it's square. in the title sequence it says ©1997 Square Kiran 01:59, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

It's Squaresoft the only Final Fantasy that has the companys name as Square is 8 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.0.50.211 (talk) 11:02, August 22, 2007 (UTC)

It's explained above. Square was the company who developed and published it. --Onorem♠Dil 11:10, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Was originally SquareSoft but they merged with Enix Co. So the name Square Enix Ltd. --::semper fidelis:: 15:42, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] A relevant source?

Smith, Greg M. (December 2002). "Computer Games Have Words, Too: Dialogue Conventions in Final Fantasy VII.". Game Studies 2 (2). 

It might help to provide that all-important third-party out-of-universe reception and analysis for the sections on plot. Just a suggestion...Geuiwogbil 18:12, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

yeh, sorry the re-write is taking a while, i havent had that much spare time. i'll get round to it, though :P Kiran 10:26, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A broken source

Ref #43 seems to be empty.

Also please consider saying... something... anything... about #Hot Blooded Detective Joe. Kariteh 07:59, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Done filling it. — Blue。 09:39, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Citations?

We need to add plot citations into the story section. When the story section was rewritten, the plot references were stripped. Greg Jones II 14:12, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Regarding citations: The one going to the article "Massacre parents sue London Lara firm" at the end of the subsection "Critical response" doesn't exist anymore. I suppose the second one is good enough though. I just stumbled upon it while translating the article so I thought I'd mention it. Davhorn 12:11, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Keep the reference; just retrieve it from the Wayback Machine and fill in the archiveurl= and archivedate= fields of the citation template. Kariteh 15:04, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
Not archived, it says. Davhorn 16:00, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
Aww, that's a problem I guess. I don't know what should be done. Kariteh 19:53, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
That's the problem with citing webpages. MLA says to include the last known access date as a caveat to readers who are trying to look for it as to when it was last available (roughly). Therefore, it can still be cited, it's just more difficult/impossible for other readers to find. Axem Titanium 20:01, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
Would be nice if there was some archive with no copyright-limitations where we could put copies of all referenced sites. These things are bound to happen more and more as sites continue to disappear. Davhorn 21:02, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] plot changes

The plot summary is wrong. It does not start with Cloud joining AVALANCHE. It starts with an AVALANCHE mission to destroy a reactor. It starts with Cloud and Barret kicking those guards asses. its like you are put right in the fray at the beginning. I am not sure if Cloud was even a official member i think i remember him officially joining at the bar after the mission Mambi55 03:41, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

good point. i'd fix it if it was still up there........arg, its so frustrating having it reverted. if others could help with updating the re-write so it has links and such? nab a version of it from the history and get cracking? Kiran 11:02, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

im a n00b and i dont like to revise it by myself. Putting links would make it shorter but i dont know how.Mambi55 06:10, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Technically, Cloud never really joned AVALANCHE. He just agreed to do the next mission with AVALANCHE for 1500 gil. Cloud was the one who set out after Sephiroth and the rest of the gang tagged along.Kou Nurasaka 18:09, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

well TECHNICALLY, avalanche disbanded after most of them died. something that leads me to believe this is when they're confronting Rufus Shinra on top of the ShinRa building and they introduce themselves as "former members of Avalanche", implying avalanche is no longer an organisiation. or if the word' former' is not mentioned, it still indicated that the party leaving Midgar should not be refered to as 'Avalanche'. Kiran 08:48, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Translation woes

Trying to translate this into Norwegian and I'm wondering what the hell this sentence means:

Art director Yusuke Naora refers to the game's atmosphere as "strong [and] dark",[66] achieved through lighting effects that he considers "the darkest of darkest",[67] and a story that emphasised realism while drawing on a variety of myths, legends, and religious and philosophical systems to "[use] as a framework for loftier ethical aspirations and ecologically conscious evangelism".

Could someone please explain? :) Davhorn 12:37, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Here's my interpretation: He wants the atmosphere to be dramatic and dark in a very brooding manner, kind of like what Tim Burton does. To do this he chose to use lighting effects that emphasize shadows. He also wanted it to be a very real story that could be beleivable, not necessarily the elements of the story, but rather how the story unfolds. As an example a story may be considered fantasy by having an evil wizard in it, but you can emphasize realism by having realistic reactions and events as if wizards were real, and having the evil wizard act in a manner that would be beleivable from his station.. He sought to do something similar using religious and philosophical systems to be the basis. If we were to accept the religious and philosophical systems as true fact, then what follows in the story around them should be realistic. But the main theme that all of this illustrates is one of what is ecologically righteous, using judeo-christian values and applying them to the environment and nature and how to coexist peacefully without destroying the natural world around us, as well as the cliche dichotomy of good and evil that we usually see in video games. --ΔαίδαλοςΣ 19:50, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
That makes much more sense. Thanks. :) Davhorn 21:01, 26 July 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Norse Mythology Influences

I dont know if anyone has ever suggested this but there are a few references to norse mythology in ff7, the most obvious is Midgar, which is the home and beginning of the game, which is of clear influence of midgard, which means our earth/world which again has link to the mako sucking the life from the earth, another reference is fenrir, which is the bike cloud rides, fenrir is a big part of norse mythology and is a wolf...which is the animal that cloud wears as a brooch, I personally dont have spoken confirmation from like an interview, but i think its worth a mention in the page somewhere 82.40.237.75 23:36, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Seems like some reasonable assumptions, but it doesn't deserve a mention unless there are reliable sources that make the connection for us. --Onorem♠Dil 01:08, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
Odin is also a summon. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.3.113.123 (talk • contribs).
Mythology should be viewed as influencing the whole Japanese anime, manga and gaming industry, not just FFVII. We got Ragnarok, Odin(along with Gungnir) in a lot of past and future FF series, in Tales series, and in Valkyrie Profile just in the Gaming category. MythSearchertalk 02:37, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Norse mythology has a lot to do with Final Fantasy in general as well as indirectly. Let's not forget that the designers of the first FF were huge fans of D&D which is directly influenced by Lord of the Rings which is completely inspired by Norse Mythology. Norse mythology and Final Fantasy have a very long and intimate history. --ΔαίδαλοςΣ 20:14, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Who said Lord of The Rings is in any way Nordic? The author JRR Tolkien denies that in an article cited in asiaweek magazine. I'll try to dig that issue up. But FF series is not Nordic at all compared to Ragnarok. --::semper fidelis:: 16:16, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Final Fantasy VII Remake

I heard that there was going to be a remake of Final Fantasy VII for the PS3. Is there any comfirmation or denial of this?

That "trailer" is actually just a tech demo to display the PS3's power. Square Enix has given no comments on whether there's a remake or not. (Meanwhile, people continue to assume they will make one.)—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 17:09, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Well, the models built for the techno demo seems to be very useful in FFVII:AC and FFVII:DC probably will still be useful in FFVII:CC, isn't it?


there are no plans to remake the game it was recently apoligized for that it caused confusion among fans that belived such.--Dalaga Helios 20:33, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pc development

Eidos released a Final Fantasy VII alpha demo with various pc games eg: Fighting Force, Braveheart and Soul Reaver. It lets people play a section of the game around Corel. The demo is designed for 3DFX cards only and the .exe is dated as March 18 1998. On the same disk is a software only demo that includes the golden saucer fights, the .exe is dated June 19 1998. Would that be enough evidence to support that the 3dfx build closet to completion at that time, seeing as it was a public playable demo. Atirage 14:34, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Compilation of Final Fantasy VII split

The Compilation of Final Fantasy VII section was uncomplete; I added some details into it and it's becoming quite long. I also added an Audio subsection stub since one was missing. The article is so long that it takes a while to load the page each time one loads or edits it (I don't have such a low Internet connection, but it's noticeable compared with other articles); the CoFFVII's section is only remotely connected with the rest of the article (after the gigantic FFVII Development section comes this long CoFFVII section about yet another development); and the CoFFVII's utterly missing Audio section makes the FA criteria spirit cries. I think it should be split. Kariteh 15:44, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

If you look at the redirect's page history, you'll see that it used to be its own article (see this discussion about merging it). But, perhaps it can stand alone again seeing as how the FFVII article is starting to bulge. ~ Hibana 23:51, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
Okay since everyone agrees, I'll split the section in a while. Kariteh 14:50, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Setting section

See todo box above. Kariteh 14:48, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Well I tagged the wrong template but anyway (fixed now)... To be more explicite: this section has a main article, Gaia (Final Fantasy VII), and thus it is supposed to be a small summary of that article (or what's relevant from it, at least). However, the current section is very long, and it's almost more encyclopedic/less crufty than the Gaia article! This, plus the fact that the FFVII article is really long in kilobyte, should be a reason to move most of the section to the Gaia article, leaving here only a small summary. Kariteh 21:57, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bias in 3rd paragraph...

The third paragraph (after several edits and reverts) currently reads:

A major critical and commercial success, the game remains arguably the most popular title in the series (emphasis to draw attention)

I feel that this wording is very POV/Biased, as the word Arguably is just a qualifier that proves it. Previous wording was that "the game remains one of the most popular titles" rather than "the game remains arguably the most popular title".

While it can be proven easily that it is one of the most popular (sales records, quantity of discussions regarding the game, quantity of information available online) it cannot be proven that it is the MOST POPULAR as this is a subjective measure. Entered as a discussion topic rather than immediate edit to prevent automatic revert for vandalism. 216.69.223.249 00:06, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

The article was FA-passed with the word included. I don't think it's POV at all. It is fact that you can argue that FFVII is the most popular title in the series. Ergo, not POV. Axem Titanium 03:30, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unneeded iconic scene

Resolved.

One editor is in the opinion that the picture of Sephiroth killing Aerith is unneeded, but failed to address the reason why and instead asked why it was needed instead. I agree the POV on the use of the phrase "iconic", but the article was passed as an FA with that picture on it, so should the picture be removed in a whim or restored? — Blue。 15:45, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

I didn't "fail to address the reason", like mentioned it was simply un-needed, and also gave the POV use. You of course, couldn't think of a reason why it IS needed, either. At least you agree with the POV use. Please be mindful of "article was passed as an FA", that does not negate the possibility of problems in an article; the main problem with "consensus" is that it's never 100% right. Parjay ► Talk 15:52, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
The POV reasoning in and of itself is not a justification for the said removal, so that's a very weak argument for removal. That it was "un-needed" is, as it stands, a view you and only you hold. Chensiyuan 16:00, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Yet you can't give a reason why it should be there, either. Remember, it works both ways. Parjay ► Talk 16:01, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Again you resort to the most patently hollow arguments. If every single thing needs to be "explained why it should be there" there's no end to such pedantry. If you're saying the screenshot exceeds fair-use or something, there may be a point. Otherwise, it's obvious why screenshots are used, especially in an article on a video game. Chensiyuan 16:04, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Unneeded because it increases the page's loading time would be a reason, but being simply unneeded is POV at best. The image is used as a scene to accompany the story section. I agree with the description being POV, but the wording can simply be paraphrase not have the image be removed altogether. We want to improve the article not ruin it by minimizing usable content. — Blue。 16:05, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Again, it is you yourself with hollow, nay, zero arguement. I've asked you at least three times now, and still you have failed to give any reason why it should be there. Remember, you need a much better, quality reason to keep the image on the article than I need to remove it. Yes game screenshots are used, but why this particular one, embellished with OR, and a huge spoilerific event from the game? Even the people that know we don't mark spoilers and keep them to the story/plot section cannot skip past that section without seeing that image. Parjay ► Talk 16:09, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
No, the onus is on you. You want to drag something to the talkpage and think that everyone should pander to you, go ahead. Gotta love these liabilities. The fact that this article has gone through a FAC shows agreement over the content to a large extent. The onus is on you to show why the thing is "unneeded", and you only just opened your mouth in the last post. Chensiyuan 16:12, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Afraid not, if you want to keep it in, it's on you. And really, loose the pompous "I've edited 9 million articles" attitude, it does you no favours. Parjay ► Talk 16:15, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Never resort to this kind of argument, please. We asked you why the image is unneeded. State your reasons. That's all. With the reasons we'll see if we'll keep it or no. — Blue。 16:18, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
You have still not given a reason why it is NEEDED, either. It works both ways, despite the "ganging up". A thousand images from the game could be used in place of that one, and yet you still have not given a reason why a big event from the game such as that is used. Even for the people that know we don't include spoiler warnings on the wiki in the plot/story section, readers still can't get past that section without seeing a huge spoilerific image plastered across the page. One that can't be replaced with a thousand others, nor does it have a rationale for being there now the "iconic" thing doesn't apply. Hey, maybe I'm just the only wiki editor with morals. Parjay ► Talk 16:23, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Um, there's no ganging up here. And despite having thousands of images, not one editor came up and give the article one to replace. That picture displaying a big event is a POV, IMHO. Again, there's a lot of argument on that one, but the picture stays because it the job for the article to give knowledge, and this is what the image displays; being a spoiler image (and iconic image) is a POV, which is yours in the moment. So, I can still see no reason for the image being unneeded, aside for being "spoilerish", a common no-end argument in wikipedia and in the end a POV.
The image stays because it is part of the story of the game, and it can be used to portray the game's graphics, and spoilers are POV. There are more reasons where the image can help the article, I know other editors may help say which. — Blue。 16:31, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
And yet somehow, illogically, you believe that your belief that it isn't a spoiler and POV is not POV? Of course it is. Stop trying to make me out as a bad guy, and accept that your arguments are basically the same as mine if you apply your rationale to them. Parjay ► Talk 16:33, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
No, Parjay, wikipedia is an encyclopedia with the aim to give knowledge. We don't discriminate by saying this image is spoilerish and shouldn't be in it, like what your argument is culminating on. If it helps the article in many ways, it is good for the wiki. Simply as that. We know it's a spoiler, but spoiler is POV, and wikipedia does not care if it is a spoiler, it's part of what makes the story. We're not making you a bad guy, you're the one labeling yourself bad. — Blue。 16:41, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
No, we do not discriminate. What we do however, is write good, solid articles without lowering the quality with questionable choices. You two "editors" seem happy to do so though, so be it. Let the article continue on its downward spiral. Sigh. Parjay ► Talk 16:48, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
(indent)We may have lack the time to help fix the article, as we all have our own lives to deal with, but we are certainly not letting it "continue on" its so-called "downward spiral". The image has been there since its FA moments. There we go, this discussion ends here. — Blue。 16:56, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Not for nothing, but I would argue that the scene is "iconic". Practically every retrospective or magazine feature about FFVII mentions it as "the most emotional scene in a video game ever" (or some variation of that). It is iconic. And that is why we include it. To address some of your other concerns, an image cannot be "OR"; the onus for removal is indeed on you because there have been over 13 months of precedent and an FAC that contend to include the image; each image in the article depicts a different view of the game (e.g. battle screen, field screen, FMV, character art, etc.) and that image is used to depict FMV. You want reasons? You got reasons. I don't want to hear your fluffy bombastic rhetoric any more. Axem Titanium 18:15, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Axem, you might want to add at least one magazine feature or web feature that cites the scene as most iconic. Just a heads up. — Blue。 18:24, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Gamespot, GameTrailers, DigNews, to name just a few. Axem Titanium 19:00, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
I know I really have no place in this argument since I haven't played through FFVII completely yet and cannot speak for a majority of people here since I haven't reached the point where Aeris dies... but IMHO now that there are references for the 'iconic scene' argument (see the comment directly above mine), and since this image is used for something (to illustrate the use of FMV for cutscenes), I believe that it's been established that the image IS needed, and since Parjay cannot supply a counter-argument saying why it is NOT needed, this dispute is now, for all intents and purposes, over, in favor of the majority, and the image will be kept. Now, I'm not saying it is, and I have no authority to say it is, I'm just saying that really continuing would be prolonging what's already for the most part, a resolved issue. It is up to you, the ones truly involved in this dispute, to cone to a decision and end it. Yadaman 23:52, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Wow, it's so awesome when someone else tells you what you can and cannot do. Anyhow, the issue is obviously fine now you have references for the 'iconic scene', with reason to keep the image, good work. Parjay ► Talk 13:39, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

I found this so-called "most emotional moment in a game" to be nothing special. We see a Lego Man (sephiroth) stabbing a Lego Woman (aeris). How is this in any way emotional? It's like watching toys, not real people. ----- If you need a different photo for an FMV/prerecorded movie, I could think of better examples... like the long-distance shot of the train as it moves through the city (an example clearly beyond the capability of a 32-bit CPU - hence the need for a prerecorded movie). Theaveng 16:11, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

P.S. I just looked at the scene. My PS1 version of Final Fantasy 7 doesn't look anything like the image shown in the Wiki article. That's a screenshot??? It looks more like some artist's hand-drawn painting. - Theaveng 16:13, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

No that is most definitely a screenshot of the game. This video, around 00:39 seconds in. Axem Titanium 21:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

I would quit the image if I knew how, its a big spoiler that isnt needed —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.157.136.160 (talk) 04:36, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

This game was made ages ago. Every vague piece of FF7 media since states outright, Aerith is dead. Even casual gamers concede that You Should Know This Already.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 13:25, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
I know this has been "resolved", but i really think that image should be removed, its a HUGE spoiler and it doesnt matter if the game was made ages ago, theres still people who didnt play it and dont know that Aeris dies; for example i played FF7 for the first time less that a year ago and now its one of my favourite games. Thanks god i didnt searched in wikipedia for the game before playing it, or it would have probably ruined one of the most important moments of the game; i really dont think that image should be there--Jim88Argentina (talk) 21:53, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Please read WP:SPOILER. The point of an encyclopedia is to describe notable things about stuff. It's not a review site. If you didn't want to know notable things about the game, you shouldn't have checked Wikipedia. Kariteh (talk) 21:58, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
thanks! i didnt know that--Jim88Argentina (talk) 00:04, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Poor citation problem

Another problem rampant on this article is the seemingly poor citation no. 64 (Coming to America: The making of Final Fantasy VII and how Squaresoft conquered the RPG market). How exactly can we rationale the use of a self published web page as a reliable source? Let alone a self published web page that clearly states that not everything in it is true? Parjay ► Talk 22:35, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Another problem? What's the other one? Kariteh 22:40, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Is there any rationale for keeping that reference, that you know of? It's used so many times throughout the article, and I can't see it being reliable (since it also states, itself, that it isn't reliable). (Edit: the other problems are noted on the article itself with tags, plot, updates, etc.)Parjay ► Talk 22:44, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
That article's sources are no better than anyone's. It does not state that it is unreliable, only that certain reports conflicted with each other. Thus, the author did his best to present a contiguous account of the process. If you have a better reference, go add it. Axem Titanium 22:52, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
But does it really meet the WP:RS criteria? It seems the author acknowledges that he sometimes arbitrarily (=Original research?) chose one statement over another because of conflicting accounts. Kariteh 22:55, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Regardless, under wiki's guidlines for reliable sources, no.64 clearly is not. Also, the writer of said article states that because of the conflicts "I do not claim that everything in this paper is true"; obviously such material cannot be used as a reliable source, especially on a featured article!(Whoever passes these articles needs shot). I'll remove them and replace with citation requests. Parjay ► Talk 22:59, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] rewrite

ok, im back from my wikihiatus in 1 week and shall address all of that ^^^ when i have some time. i plan to put sources and cites into my old plot summary and i will comment on the above arguments in the near future. just thought id let u all know cause u all care so much about my life :P --Kiran 06:56, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Endless Crisis

I was on the List of PlayStation 3 games article and they mentioned a new Final Fantasy VII game called Endless Crisis: Final Fantasy VII. Should we mention this in the article so people will know? Ryu-chan (Talk | Contributions) 19:37, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Wow, seems like a really emo title. Anyway, the "source" given is so laughably speculative that I would probably discount it until TGS actually rolls around. Wikipedia is not a rumor mill. Axem Titanium 22:11, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
well then should it be on the List of PlayStation 3 games then? Kiran 12:20, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
If there is a source the game really does exist..or at least mentioned by an official source. — Blue。 12:54, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gaia reference

User:Misza13 deleted Image:ACE3pamphlet.JPG, so I removed the link. Taric25 05:49, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Setting section

I assume that, although the moving of the overly massive setting section was appropriate in my opinion, there is going to be a new Setting section that is one to two paragraphs long to replace it? Judgesurreal777 20:18, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Yay, excellent! Judgesurreal777 22:03, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Massively multiplayer online Setting section. MMOSS. Hahaha. Yeah, so I put back in the first two paragraphs because leaving them completely out looked weird and they seemed to fit. Axem Titanium 22:21, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] It looks vandalized

The article looks vandalized as of 12/1/07 11:35 mountain time. I don't know enough about ffVII to fix it. Someone please help! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.167.14.176 (talk) 06:37, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Reverted. — TKD::Talk 06:47, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Main Image Caption

Cloud is NOT the antagonist of the game, as some people have been saying in the article. Please, if you agree of disagree, post here Weirdude (talk) 05:47, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

If you still disagree, please just leave it as 'main character', it is correct, we all agree. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Weirdude (talk • contribs) 05:53, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
...you mean "protagonist"? An antagonist is the bad guy...—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 05:59, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Ah, lol, I thought he put antagonist....rofl. Weirdude (talk) 08:43, 20 December 2007 (UTC)


I completely changed it, making it more factual. Please if you have a better idea, post here and change it. Weirdude (talk) 16:45, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Emerald Weapon and Ruby Weapon

How come they're not mentioned?--Dr who1975 (talk) 03:21, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Probably since they are not notable per the whole article and have been covered in the Monsters of Final Fantasy article. — Blue。 03:29, 31 December 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Remove Screenshot of Areis in Starting Party

This is obviously fake, You can tell that she has been added via gameshark/action replay, it is obviously not an early screenshot becuase it is a screenshot of a computer playing the game with a playstaion emulator (toolbar is at top of screenshot) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Master22988 (talk • contribs)

If you'd read the article, it explains that the image is from "Square's Preview Extra", a special disk with an early beta version of the game which included Aeris. Axem Titanium (talk) 21:17, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Snowboarding Comparison.jpg

Image:Snowboarding Comparison.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:23, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Fixed. --PresN (talk) 16:47, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Audio

I note that a lot of these articles don't have any audio media. Of course, the music is under copyright, but we are allowed to use fair use samples. Given that the music is an important part of these games I would expect to see one or two music samples in articles like this (maybe battle theme and main theme, for example?). Richard001 (talk) 00:24, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Actually, if you go to Music of Final Fantasy VII, you'll notice 4 sound samples. All of the FF games have music pages associated with them, though of variable quality, from Start class to GA. --PresN (talk) 03:33, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Oh, I see... Maybe one should be linked from here as well, e.g main theme. Many won't read all the sub-articles and might not realize there are any music samples available. Richard001 (talk) 05:44, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Story

The story section is pretty long, as noted in the to do list. Would a separate article story of Final Fantasy VII be a possibility? If the characters and world are notable enough for their own sub-articles, shouldn't the story section be notable as well? It would certainly make it easier to reduce the size of the section here.

Ah, looks like this has already been discussed. I would have thought there would at least be a few reliable sources that discuss the story of the game, though.
By the way, while I'm here I might point out the lead could be a little longer. For such a long article 4 paragraphs would probably be in order. Richard001 (talk) 06:43, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

You are more than welcome to do it yourself. The Prince (talk) 20:43, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] will anyone get it right?

Sephirpth was frozen the entire game. Jenova was a shapeshifter. After Aerith dies, you fight jenova. Is it really that hard to put together? Jenova attacked Aerith, not Sephiroth. You'd think after 10 years someone would make a note of that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.123.62.65 (talk) 05:33, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Your own intepretation to the game is totally irrelevant and incorrect. Read the script and official game material before you add your own imaginary intepretation to it. MythSearchertalk 07:54, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
No, actually this is correct. Throughout the entire duration of the game, Sephiroth is in the Northern Crater. The "black-caped man" is Jenova. Hellomistergibbs (talk) 21:29, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
No, actually, this is uncorrect. FightingStreet (talk) 22:15, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Then support your argument. For a start:
Ifalna: "It looked like... our... our dead mothers... and our dead brothers. Showing us spectres of their past."
Sephiroth: "Cloud... Don't blame Tifa. The ability to change one's looks, voice, and words, is the power of Jenova."
Tifa: "Not Sephiroth!? You mean all this time it wasn't Sephiroth we were after?"
You find Sephiroth's physical body encased in mako in the Crater, where it has presumably been since being washed there in the Lifestream five years previously. Hellomistergibbs (talk) 19:41, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
You do understand this only affects his physical body and not his mind, right? This part specifically states that Jenova got the power to change other people's looks, voice and words, not only its own. MythSearchertalk 02:39, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Does this include the power to install massive power in the people it change?Cyrus Beautor (talk) 01:34, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
I don't know if it is massive or not, but obviously Jenova's cells are able to make one more powerful when injected into one's body. This is not a forum, move this somewhere else. MythSearchertalk 07:07, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Since when is Wikipedia a forum? Eatspie (talk) 00:34, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
I think this is a relevant discussion to the article, because putting bad information into a former FA is a big Wikipedia no-no. Anyway, the OP was right; Sephiroth is encased in Materia in the Northern Crater for the duration of the game - he isn't fought in person until the very end. The "Sephiroth" that is seen before that is a cluster of Jenova cells that are shaped by Sephiroth's supernaturally powerful will - while he is frozen. Phoenix1304 (talk) 11:08, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
I believe, since the game's plot is so convoluted with so many key points capable of being interpreted in numerous ways, that any "definite" summary of the story in any manner of detail should be avoided. The plot section of the article is already flagged as being too long and detailed. In my experience, this is a persistent problem with articles about involved RPGs and anime series. People don't come to Wikipedia for an entire reiteration of the story, they come for a basic summary with few to no spoilers (although at this point in time, spoiling FFVII is like spoiling the original Star Wars films). No one should be arguing about the plot in the first place, because these details are superfluous and achieve nothing more than to lengthen the article beyond what is appropriate. I don't know how this managed to be a featured article - other than simply because the game was so popular - because I can't imagine any random person, having not played this game, sitting through eleven overly long paragraphs on the plot, which makes much use of in-game terminology causing it to be overly detailed and confusing. The fact that fans cannot understand this is making shortening these articles a lost cause. I cannot tell you how hard many people tried to shorten and ultimately rewrite the plot section for the Last exile article, which was at one point over 20 pages long. Xaphon (talk) 16:36, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Shortening the Story section would definitely help the article. What about the plot summary as written here? Do you think it will be more suitable for Wikipedia - with a few tweaks and corrections of course. — Blue。 16:53, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
I think the plot summary you supplied is very good, Blue. It is brief but detailed. I'd say add one more paragraph extrapolating on Cloud's inner self journey or whatever you want to call it, or just the nature of Cloud's sort of delusional state. One paragraph, though. Let's try and keep this brief and condensed. (67.80.69.170 (talk) 00:24, 5 May 2008 (UTC))

[edit] Expansion of "Related media and merchandise"

This seciont is quite out-dated, or just isn't covering much of the other merchandise produced by the series. Could we possibly tag it for expansion? Then again, I don't want to have two tags on just that one section. 68.209.235.149 (talk) 22:34, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I've added an expansion tag. Note that you can merge different tags with Template:Articleissue. FightingStreet (talk) 16:50, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Wow, that's handy. I wish I knew about this before. 68.209.235.149 (talk) 00:33, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Aeris and Zack

The player learns that the previously-seen dark-haired SOLDIER is named "Zack", and was Aeris' first boyfriend.

You do not learn this when playing Final Fanstasy VII. This information is only learned when playing Crisis Core.

199.190.155.2 (talk) 18:52, 30 March 2008 (UTC)Chris

And yet the sentence has been in the article for years before Crisis Core was ever released...hmm.... --PresN (talk) 03:29, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
It's in a short story in the Ultimania Omega. It's told from Aerith's perspective. One line I remember is something to the effect of "Aerith noticed the similarities to Zack, her first love, but began to love Cloud more than she had ever Zack."—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 03:43, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure (especially after consulting with another friend) that "Zack" is named in the dialog boxes in one of the flashback scenes when we discover Cloud's *true* history. Not entirely sure if they explicitly confirm that he was Aeris' first boyfriend, but I think at worst we're supposed to assume that he is indeed, based on various dialog throughout the game (including some optional stuff with Tifa and Aeris at Gongaga). *does some game guide checking* Yeah, I think at Gongaga, Tifa and/or Aeris will "react as if [Zack] were a former lover". --Umrguy42 (talk) 03:55, 31 March 2008 (UTC) PS- I'm not suggesting of course that we cite a game guide, just that since its information presumably comes from direct game dialog (plus what I remember from game dialog), it should be okay (I think), as being from the primary source (the game).
The way I remember it, Zack was Tifa's first boyfriend as revealed during the "real" Nibelheim flashback that Sephiroth shows Cloud who himself took on that role when Tifa first met him at the train station. Tifa was from Nibelheim, Aeris hadn't been there. Anynobody 02:57, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
Actually, I think both Tifa and Aeris had some kind of relationship with Zack (see my above comment, referencing the game guide and what it says about entering Gongaga with Tifa and/or Aeris). Confusing, and I don't remember (or pretend to even know) all the hows, whens, and whys, but *checks guide* here:
“ There's not too much happening here [at Gongaga], but one important event unfolds here, if you have either Tifa or Aerith (or both) in your party. Talk to the folks in the Southeast home, and they'll tell you of their Soldier son, Zacks[sic]. If Aerith or Tifa are in your party, they'll react as if he were a former lover.... ”

—Versus Books, The Completely Unauthorized Final Fantasy VII Ultimate Guide, p. 39
(emphasis mine). So, it's both of them (or either of them). And it IS in the game. umrguy42 03:26, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Picture of Sephiroth and Aeris

I strongly feel that the picture of Sephiroth killing Aeris needs to go. I have only started playing it a few days ago, and did not know that happened in the game, so seeing that picture ruined what my friend calls "one of the best parts of the game"

Spoiler TEXT is easy to avoid, all you have to do is not read it. But avoiding seeing a picture is a little harder. I think that the picture should be removed so anybody else who hasn't played the game yet but wants to won't have that part of the storyline ruined for them.

The picture caption said it is one of the most shocking moments in video game history. Not for me, and thanks a lot for ruining it wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by EpsilonX2008 (talk • contribs) 14:13, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Please read WP:SPOILER. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a review site or a buying guide. If you don't want to know what happens in the game ahead of time, avoid reading the game's article on Wikipedia. That's akin to reading a walkthrough... Kariteh (talk) 15:15, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Good grief, if you are playing an eleven year old game for the first time and expect to come to an encyclopedia article about the game and not be spoiled, then you have problems that wikipedia cannot solve. Seriously, if you don't want spoilers, stay away from discussions of the game period. Indrian (talk) 23:38, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

I remember playing the game back in 1997 and new before hand that aeris was killed. the spoil game to me 4 months before the north american release...sadly a game with this much hype something like that could not be kept a secret nor excluded from the article Ottawa4ever (talk) 19:44, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Updates for Recent Information

There are a few tags on the page that say certain sections need to be updated with current information. In the characters section it makes some sense because there may be new information presented about characters in Crisis Core. (I personally don't think any information from Crisis Core is necessary for this page, although if some info from Crisis Core is used, it should be kept to a minumum and should not contain spoilers for that game, marked or unmarked.) In the reception section, the tag doesn't seem to make any sense to me. The release of Crisis Core should not effect the reception of FFVII. In short, do we need to do anything with these tags, or can they just be deleted? Chris3145 (talk) 12:07, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

New comments go at the bottom of the talk page. Anyway, the information in Reception stops at 2005 even though the game continued to win polls and awards after that date. This is why it needs to be updated. The section also needs to be restructured, because the difference between Reception and Legacy doesn't seem very clear (why is Dengeki mentioned in Legacy?). Kariteh (talk) 12:26, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Advent Children CG Movie

You should watch the FFVII movie then. A blast.! After almost a decade since Spirits Within. GUI are great and the design too. SquareEnix made history again. --::semper fidelis:: 15:46, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] What needs to be updated?

The character section says it needs to be updated. But, as a reader I see nothing wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.72.221.194 (talk) 09:59, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Updated comments from recent interviews, updated information about the Compilation of FFVII, recent character polls and awards, etc. Kariteh (talk) 10:47, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Too many tags

There are too many tags, the one banner at the top covers most of the criticism and the rest just seem like over kill. --Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 00:59, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

These article and section tags don't cover the same problems. Besides, some people still ask what the section tags are for (see discussions above) so replacing them by article-wide tags would probably be less useful. Kariteh (talk) 09:55, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
Hmm, ok, i still think its over kill, put if it gets people to sort the article out its probably worth it. Being a huge FF fan myself i decided to give the article a look, i only read the plot, its a little jumbly. I think you should write a plot in a sandbox together build up a solid story then brink it bsbk over here. --Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 15:02, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Development section update

Kitase did a new interview about FFVII in the latest issue of Level Magazine, according to [3]. New interesting info include the fact that FFVII was originally intended to be a SNES game taking place in New York in 1999, etc. Has anyone got that magazine? Kariteh (talk) 15:20, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Copy Editing

I'll take a look at it and respond here when finished.