Talk:Final Fantasy VII/Archive 5

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Censorship

Was Final Fantasy VII censored at all? I mean, the content wasn't as strong as, say, Final Fantasy VIII's, but I would imagine something was censored. Plus, it doesn't say anything about censorship on this page. Could someone please answer to this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.224.109.205 (talk • contribs)

Not that I recall. It certainly wasn't censored as much as the older games were. Koweja 18:44, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

As I recall, some language was censored, some wasn't. --Daedalus 21:54, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

The word "bastard" appeared on various occasions, but "fuck" and "shit" were censored. Plebmonk 23:14, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

<---- recet indent

Some words were censored, some were not, which ones seem arbitrary. Only instance I could find of "Fuck" uncensored:

Computer: Cid! We have an emergency situation! A mechanic is still in the engine section of the rocket!

Cid: What!? Who is the little fuck!?

Computer: I don't know. Activating the intercom in the engine section.

Cid: Hey goddammit!! Who the #*$$#&'s still in there?

Earliest instance of "Shit"

Shinra Manager: I'm not give in to violence…and I'm not giving you my seat either!

Tifa: Barret!!

Barret: #^*$!! You lucky #$#*!

Cloud: So, what are we gonna do now?

Barret: Shit! The hell you so calm about? You bustin' up my rhythm…

In total, "Fuck" is said uncensored once, "Shit" is said uncensored 12 times, "ass" is said 15 times (sometimes occuring as Jackass), "Damn" is said 68 times, and I couldn't find any occurances of "Bastard". Censored words appear approx. 33 times. --Daedalus 16:36, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

My version must be different. The "fuck" is censored, and the comment with Barret the last editor quoted, the first word was uncensored(though it had an apostrophe stuck in the middle, making it "shi't". I noted a lot of uncensored "ass" and "shit" though, and after playing FFX and FFXII for so long, going back and playing FFVII, I was a little surprised by the language. In fact, it's the only Fantasy RPG I've ever played with uncensored profanity. But yes, it was at least partially censored.--Vercalos 08:42, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Nevertheless, unless we get concrete primary sourcing from an interview or whatever, we can't include this in the article. — Deckill er 09:10, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, the box says it's rated teen for mild language and violence... But I'm not sure of any primary sources that would even deal with this particular issue..--Vercalos 11:21, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Beyond a mention that there is some uncensored language I really don't think this type of info belongs in an encyclopedia. And even the slight mention is iffy to me. --Daedalus 16:27, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, it's the first Final Fantasy to come to America with any uncensored language. But then again, all the Final Fantasies to come to America in that period of time had to go through Nintendo of America's censorship guidelines of the time.--Vercalos 22:58, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

It might be worth noting (at least in the discussion) that the computer version was far more censored than the PSX version. Almost every instance of "shit" was removed, consistently with #^$& or similar characters. Also, certain important lines had their translations changed. "Back then, you could get by with only skinned knees", for example, was changed to something likely more grammatically correct, but weird to a long time player of the PSX version. 216.93.154.218 12:07, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I have the PC version of FF7 and I recall a TON of Cid lines where there was censorship as well as ones form Barret. They were all situations of anger though so it didn't impact the storyline much.

Actually there was some sexual censorship if I recall. "Slightly stretched underwear" was changed to "Therapeutic underwear." Not sure why it's better, but I'm pretty sure they did it because they thought "slightly stretched" was sexually inappropriate. (The item is found in Tifa's dresser drawer during the nibelhiem flashback sequence.)

Mentioning Midgar's future

During the epilogue that follows, the ruins of Midgar are shown five hundred years later. While the landscape had once been desolate due to Shinra's operations, it is now a land of lush greenery.

This sentence should be removed as it is trivial, unnecessary, and uhhh too minor for mention, and there is no explanation for this scene. Kariteh 10:33, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

The explanation doesn't have to be written or stated explicitly. This is a flash forward, to where groups like Avalanche have succeeded in saving the planet. The planet has presumably recovered and is letting life grow where its life, the Lifestream, was stolen before, similar to how plants will grow after a fire desolates an area. It may be 'trivial', and it's not necessary to the story, but it's there to give people a warm fuzzy feeling in knowing that the good guys succeeded in their mission. That's what I think anyway. Nique1287 13:36, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that's what you think. That's just an opinion, unlike Tidus' rebirth in FFX which is a fact. Kariteh 13:59, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Again, the shot of Midgar being overgrown with plants is an open-ended ending, you can interpret it the way you want to. The part of the FFX ending where Tidus is 'reborn' has no explanation, not even an IMPLIED explanation, whereas in FFVII Shinra had basically been dismantled, Sephiroth had been destroyed, and the planet was allowed to recover, so it follows that Midgar would be overgrown with plants after it was abandoned. On top of that, the "sequel", FFVII: Advent Children, doesn't nullify the ending of FFVII, whereas the sequel to FFX, FFX-2, does, since its beginning occurs when the rebirth of Tidus had not yet taken place. Also, please remember to assume good faith on Wikipedia unless good faith is proven to have been broken. I only say that this scene should stay in the summary, when I was against the inclusion of the Tidus scene, because this scene has reason, explanation without too many leaps of faith, and it fits in with what had happened at the end of the game. Nique1287 15:03, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

FFX-2 doesn't nullify the ending of FFX: you are yourself saying that it begins before the rebirth of Tidus has taken place. It would contradict something if it began after the supposed rebirth, but it's not. It begins before. So where's the difference here?? FFVII: Advent Children also takes place before the ruined Midgar scene (which is stated to happen 500 years after FFVII in FFVII), so of course it doesn't nullify the ending of the game. I fail to see where's the difference between the two examples. The two sentences in the two articles should either both remain or both be removed. Kariteh 15:13, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

FFX itself gives no explanation for the scene with Tidus. FFVII does give an implied explanation, if you do more than just watch the pretty shiny moving things on the screen, for the scene of Midgar. That's the difference. Nique1287 15:19, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Just a note, what goes on in one article has absolutely no bearing in another article. There is no rule saying that every article should be treated exactly the same. Axem Titanium 23:57, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Unnecessary image

I've read a discussion in the archives on why the image of Aeris' death should be kept but found the reasons unsatisfactory, not because it's a "spoiler" (which is a different topic altogether), but because it really serves no purpose in this article. The purpose of an image in an encyclopedia article is usually to show what cannot be described in words, such as how a person/place/map/logo/thing looks like, otherwise an image would be pointless if words can already describe it quite clearly. Aeris' death can easily be summed up in a few sentences, so what exactly is the purpose of this image? In addition, why sould this particular image be kept instead of the many other "iconic" images in FFVII? One of the reasons in the archives was that this scene is apparently "the most notable aspect of the story", which itself is a biased and POV reason to keep this image. I really don't see the point in keeping this unnecessary image, unless there are any other reasons why this image should be kept? Jagged 85 04:31, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I suppose it's because it is the "most iconic" scene in the game, according to many, many independent sources. Whenever this game is mentioned in any review or publication, the scene is mentioned and Nojima himself has said that it was put it with that intention. Fair use law says that only a limited number of images can be included in an article so the most relevant one was chosen. Axem Titanium 04:45, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

As well as the picture being iconic its actually example of the different graphics in the game. All the pictures on the page show a different view of the game. The images are field map, battle screen, full FMV, Nomura art (not graphic in game of course), and not full FMV (Aerith and Sephiroth pic). The picture completes the whole collection from the game. It serves more of a purpose than just to illustrate "the scene". J-Axe

Final Fantasy VII staff list

I am trying to get the names of the production staff. I want to add staff members to the article under the production staff. It just gets deleted over and over. Can you help me? I was wondering about this. I really need to put the commentaries in ther as well. I tried to help, but I couldn't do it. I am really scared and it is driving me crazy. Please help. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sjones23 (talk • contribs) 22:40, 5 January 2007 (UTC).

The list of staff is trivial. It is not necessary for the integrity of the article, and if anything it detracts from the style of the article. As I've said in my edit summaries, credits are given at the end of the game if people want to know everyone who contributed to the production of the game. Extended lists, such as production staff with no commentary, just as a list, have no place on Wikipedia. Nique1287 22:43, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I have no idea what "commentaries" you're talking about but per WP:NOT#IINFO and WP:TRIVIA, the production lists fail to be interesting or important (despite being factual) and can be easily found in imdb or some other website that doesn't have content restrictions like Wikipedia. Axem Titanium 23:01, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, the important (relevant) staff members are already listed in the infobox at the top right side of the page, and are also described in the Development section. No need to repeat the information in a list with no commentary. Kariteh 23:39, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, Kariteh and AxemTitanium, I agree with your opinions, but I was just only trying to help add some more important people to the list, but I can do that in the infobox. Oh, wait, I can tell you that there are also the full staff list at [[Moby Games. --Sjones23 01:10, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

If it's already there, why does it have to be duplicated here? If it's useful as an external link, then add it. We even have a template for it: {{moby game}} Axem Titanium 01:43, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I guess you are right.--Sjones23 22:01, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

spoiler

for a feature article, I'd wonder why major plot points don't have a spoiler warning. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Joeblack982 (talk • contribs) 10:57, 14 January 2007 (UTC).

See #Spoiler Warning; this was recently discussed (again). — TKD::Talk 11:54, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Because it's a featured article. Only bad articles have spoiler warnings. I normally notice that whenever a page has no spoiler warning, it's normally well-written and comprehensive. --TheEmulatorGuy 05:21, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Well said. — Deckill er 09:09, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Typographical Dissonance

Deleted an unnecessary comma in the "Criticism" subsection, in the first sentence of the second paragraph.

I am finding few other problems with the grammatical integrity of the article, and hold it as one of the best I've seen in the community. .Absolution. 10:52, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Make that "Critical response." It's late. .Absolution. 10:55, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Comment

I have a few comments. I know that Kitase and Nojima wrote the scenario, but only Nojima wrote the scenario for FFVIII. How long did development take? What is a flower merchant? What is the Compilation of Final Fantasy VII about? How many staff members worked on this game? Any information is always welcome. Sjones23 15:34, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

A flower merchant is someone who sells flowers, and the Compilation of Final Fantasy VII is all of the Final Fantasy VII related media, like Advent Children, Dirge of Cerberus, etc. "Compilation" is just what Square calls it. --PresN 22:55, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Video interviews of staff

One editor added links to videos of interviews concerning the game to the article, twice, but both times it was removed without explanation. Anyone want to give a reason for removing the interview links?--Vercalos 05:11, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

These interviews are part of the "Making of Final Fantasy VII" featurette which appears on a bonus CD in the packages of Final Fantasy VII International and Final Fantasy VII Advent Children. It is thus a commercially released product and cannot be linked in a Wikipedia article according to Wikipedia:External links. Kariteh 10:17, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

However, if the editor who added them wants, you could reference them inline, assuming you have something to add to the article that's taken from these interviews. --Daedalus 20:32, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Someone fix all the titles

some idiot has been messing with the section titles, please fix. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.129.198.248 (talk • contribs).

Can you be more specific? I see nothing wrong with the section titles. :: ZJH ^{(T C E)} 04:22, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

extreme vandalism!

Someone erased all the articles and substituted it with the Japanese flag! (ChloeSong 06:18, 4 March 2007 (UTC)) Ah. nvm. I just got rid of the image, all the info is still there. (ChloeSong 06:24, 4 March 2007 (UTC))

Orphaned clause in Development section

"As his style was considered too exquisite to be compatible with the visual format of the project, this issue was addressed by bringing Tetsuya Nomura onboard as its character designer, while Amano aided in the design of the game's world map[61] Previously a monster designer for Final Fantasy V,[64] and also designed its title logo. Nomura's style was more reminiscent of manga, and considered easier to adapt.[61]"

As you can see, the bolded line is incomplete... The clause apparently became separated from its sentence after a certain number of edits. I'd correct it but I'm not even sure who it refers to (Nomura or Amano??). Can someone fix it? Kariteh 15:24, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Also, this article is going to be featured on Wikipedia's main page, so I'd suggest everybody to reread the whole article and fix stuff if there are other stuff to fix and if they have time. Kariteh 15:26, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

This is why I wish we had stable versions for FAs :) — Deckill er 18:56, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I fixed the sentence above, although I'm not completely satisfied with how it sounds. I'll try to go through the entire article before its featured date. Axem Titanium 22:55, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Great Work!!!

Congrats for the ppl who made possible that one of my fav games appear in the main page. Great Work!!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alextrevelian 006 (talk • contribs) 01:11, 20 March 2007 (UTC).

Look at all the reverts! Shouldn't the page be protected? Matrixhax0r 01:38, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

What the deuce? I havent notice that, why in earth it isnt protected since is a featured article?. Anyway, I just requested a cascading protection --ometzit<col> 01:45, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually, featured articles are never protected. Its so anon. IPs can add more info to it (but most of them end up vandalizing the article like here [1] & [2])-- Hdt83 | Talk 01:48, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

We don't want to say "Look, this is a featured article, one of the best in Wikipedia. Unfortunately, you can't edit it." Protection is only for extreme situations. -- ReyBrujo 01:54, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

OMG thats ridiculous I didn´t know that if its a featured article it´s because is great the way it is but if someone want to see today best article and found that only niggers like FFVII or that Aeris die at the end then whats the point? Also it would be horrible finding that Aeris dies at the end, I know that because i once enter to half blood prince article and the page was replaced with a bold Dumbledure is killed at the end by snape. In any case, I didnt know that, another point less to wikipedia--ometzit<col> 02:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Since Aeris' death is out in the open...I want to point out that Aeris does not die in the end, but rather at the end of the first disc. Sumnjim 12:37, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

OMG, Aeris dies! Why did you tell me? It has been only 10 years since the game was released! Now I won't be able to enjoy the game anymore! -- ReyBrujo 02:05, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I can see a little bit of O rly? My brother havent play it nd i always have told he that is one of the best games for PS (Yeah, i still have it, it still works nd I enjoy it). In any case, if thats the policy that the almighty Jimbo imposed what can I do ;)--ometzit<col> 02:16, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Just remember to warn users when you revert, otherwise they will continue vandalizing. -- ReyBrujo 02:26, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Use test3 or blatantvandal. One warning is enough for immature mainpage vandalism. — Deckill er 02:27, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, congratz on the featured article. However, it is not clear from the summary that "Compilations of Final Fantasy VII" incorperates movies, and not just games. The fact that a good game resulted in sequel games is no surprise, but movies are significant. I don't know if this can be fit into the summary, but it should be there. This is probably the wrong place for such a comment, so when someone reads this could you please fix the summary and either move or delete my comment? Thanks (Tdmg 03:52, 20 March 2007 (UTC))

I won't delete your comment (it's bad form), but your suggestion is well taken. I'll try to incorporate it, but you're welcome to be bold and do it yourself too. Axem Titanium 04:30, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Just thought I'd swing by and say congratulations to all of the people who got this to FA status. You guys rock! Kntrabssi 04:35, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not a regular contributor to Wiki, but thank you all who've helped to get this as a featured article. It's a fantastic compilation deserving of the honor. But it gave me a big smile to see it on the main page. Thanks again! 203.129.39.176 19:46, 20 March 2007 (UTC)Joel

I also want to thank everyone for getting this on the main page. I remember when the game first came out. I already had it reserved for 6 months, and I skipped the last 1/2 of my school day to drive 40 miles to the mall to pick it up. At the time, it was the most amazing game ever made (IMO). That game gave me many ups (killing the weapons) and downs (Aeris' death). Absolutely fantastic game. Sumnjim 12:20, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah way to go making this great game FA-status!--Richard (Talk - Contribs) 12:57, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

spoilers

oh my god, i just found out Aeris dies...there should be one of those, "spoilers ahead" thingys to warn people because it just gave away a HUGE suprise for me and i'm in the middle of playing it. man, it's all spoiled for me. augh—Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.72.47.41 (talk • contribs)

The Plot and Story headers should have been the first indication that there might be spoilers ahead. --Onorem 12:11, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

The game is nearly 10 years old, I'm sorry, but I'm going to go ahead and say that the statute of limitations for FF7 spoilers has long past. Aeris' death one of the most well-known moments in gaming. The fact that it's unsigned also leads me to believe the guy is just messing around. EdenMaster 12:18, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree with it, people younger that 10 years (my bro, 4ex) who have hear about how great the game is would want to play it some time, and if we screw all the story whats the point? I believe that all plots should have spoilers warning because doesn´t matter how old is the thing, not everybody have 20 years and know about the best moments in gaming--ometzit<col> 14:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC)--ometzit<col> 14:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

The spoiler warnings are the headings "plot", "story", the length of time these pages take to load, and the walls of text. The debate about spoiler warnings has gone on for quite some time; the Final Fantasy WikiProject and a few other isolated edting bases have decided not to follow that aspect of the manual of style — Deckill er 14:10, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it's not right now. I think someone may have taken it out. I'll add it again. 204.118.51.210 14:25, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I'll clarify. I didn't say there were spoiler tags there, I said that those were the spoiler warnings, in essense. — Deckill er 14:51, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree there should be a spoiler tag. Ive seen spoiler tags on lesser spoilers then this. There are no spoiler tags ANYWHERE on this page even tho it gives away a ton of info. There are spoiler tags on the Harry Potter books... even tho just as many people have read those books as have played this game. Just because it says "plot" or "story" doesnt mean it shouldnt have a spoiler tag. The only time when a "plot" or "story" section doesnt need a spoiler tag is when, of course, there are no key spoilers mentioned in the text. Spoiler tags are seriously important and should be included in all instances where key elements are given away, with no special treatment just because something is popular. Kamiawolf 04:57, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

The point isn't popularity. It's not even related to if others have it. The point is this -- spoilers are optional. There is NO policy for them. Therefore, it's up to the editors to decide if they wish to use them or not. The editors to are the mains ones editing the article have decided, as a consensus, to not use them. You don't give ANY arguments outside of "I like them" for why they need to be there. So I ask. WHY are they important? Why should certain info be given a disclaimer, as it were, but we have to avoid all other warnings? What is a "key" spoiler anyway? I'm sure everyone could agree that, say, Aerith dying is "key", but what about, oh, that Cloud falls sick for a portion of the game? Or that Cid's rocket does end up working? Etc...

Seriously, almost every argument for spoilers I've seen has been in the "we need to protect readers from themselves" catagory. It seems like since everyone comes to expect it from most websites, they expect it here. I can sort of see that logic, but that doesn't mean that WP "should" just because others do. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 11:40, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Umm, actually, there is another reason to do what I suggest, and that is the length of you describing the story on the MAIN PAGE (which, in of itself, is kind of indecent when you consider how LONG and WORDY the description of said "spoilers" are). If for nothing else, at LEAST do what you do with the character part. (See below).—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Darkpower (talk • contribs) 11:01, 7 June 2007 (UTC).

hey there! while i'm still definitely not ready to get back into this pleasant "discussion," by y'alls own admissions you should obviously and unquestionably:

A) allow the removal or tagging of the (at least one) significant spoiler much later in the article, nowhere near the plot section whatsoever.

B) allow the removal or "cut-linking" of the image of Aeris getting it, which is rather large and VERY hard to miss while scrolling past the plot section.

please do so, as i don't want anyone to flip out on me doing it myself. peace. Elgaroo 19:13, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

"...nowhere near the plot section whatsoever..." As has also been pointed out, it's an encyclopedia. Just because there are spoilers outside of the plot and story sections doesn't warrant spoiler tagging. If there's no spoiler tagging in the most obvious places that "should" according to spoilertag fanboys, why should we tag a mention that's (presumably, since you don't say exactly WHAT it is or where) further down?
"...removal or "cut-linking" of the image of Aeris..." Why? WP:NOT#CENSOR. We're not here to protect people from themselves. It's been 10 years since the game was released. There's got to be a statute of limitations on this stuff, because 10 years after the release, people should not expect to be coddled, no matter how popular the game still is today. Aeris dies. Stuff happens. Get over it. Nique talk 13:56, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Uhh...so you're saying a spoiler tag or a article split is coddling people? C'mon. Darkpower 11:02, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Especially since it's revealed in FFVII's multiple sequels (including a full-length movie) that Aerith is dead. --—ΔαίδαλοςΣ Σ 00:37, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Please try to keep an out-universe perspective. A piece of fiction is a piece of fiction before being the sequel or the prequel to other fictions; what I mean is, all of these stuff aren't part of real history, and the internal chronology of the events is irrelevant to Wikipedia's out-universe stance (just because something happens in a sequel doesn't mean the original work has suddenly shifted in the "past"). Aerith being dead in FFVII:AC/BC/CC/DC/and whatnot is not a spoiler, but Aeris dying in FFVII is a spoiler. Kariteh 12:30, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

May I just add my view on this. I can understand the rationale behind not plastering spoiler warnings all over the article. However, I feel that the image of Aeris' death is too much. As has been said above, it's hard to miss it while scrolling through the page. It should be removed. 82.32.210.193 01:20, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Ironically, if you look at Gamespy.com, they have a feature up right now about the "25 best cutscenes", and Aeris's death is right there, no spoilers. It's not too much. The game came out 10 years ago. The statute of limitations has passed. --PresN 04:02, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I personally could care less what another website strictly run by a set amount of administrators does with their content. I believe that a spoiler is a spoiler whether its Aerith dying or any other event in a video game that may take someone by surprise. It doesn't matter how old it is, one should not assume that everyone who reads this page will be fine with finding out something crucial in the plot and ruin their experience. Besides, what's so hard about putting a little spoiler line indication anyways? - Dabomb691 08:27, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Go read WP:SPOILER there is a guideline about this and if someone is not bright enough to understand that the plot or story section will contain plot and story, they are just not bright enough to read the article altogether. MythSearcher^talk 11:05, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, there's a good touch to this debate. Tell you're audience that they are not bright enough to read an article just because they didn't see something that you think they should have. See below on the REAL reason why people are complaining.Darkpower 10:56, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

There's a HUGE problem, though, when talking about the Plot sections in ALL of these pages. I can see how the Character sections are linking to main articles that people have a choice to CLICK and go to said article, thereby neglecting the reason for such a tag, "Story" has no such page. It's just there, without any option like the other parts. My view: put the detailed story of the games (from beginning to end) on its own page (that way you eliminate the whole "don't mess with the spoiler tag or else" deal and you give the user a chance to decide whether they should delve deeper), and then leave just the beginning summary (as in, what you may see in the instructions) on the main page. Just a thought, so you don't have to be all wise-ass to everyone saying "you should know", while making debates like this all the more moot (it'll condense the actual main article, anyway, which the story sections make the pages drag out far too long).

Plus, this whole debate and how people are handling it is a bit immature. How hard is it to put a one word tag around something, and what is all the big deal if it IS in there? This whole "OMG, they actually added a SPOILER TAG, quick call to action" BS is exactly WHY Wikipedia is under fire for being loaded with people who think they're the second coming of Christ. I'm imploring you people, just fix it so everyone is happy and find something more important on these pages to whine about.Darkpower 10:54, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Though i'm of the oppinion that a sopiler warning would do better than worse, i can understand your point for not to place them. Ok, it's true that people should be intelligent enough for not to read the story if they don't want to know spoilers. But just like someone has said before, the image is too much, you can't avoid it when scrolling! I think that has to be removed... I also like the idea of the user above me, to move the story to a sepparate article. I guess it's "ok" to put all the unwarned spoilers there, even the image if you want, beacuse you won't see them unless you want to. 85.137.22.225 02:06, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Another extreme vandalism

The article Final Fantasy VII has been heavily vandalised once again...!!! Can anyone restore this article back? After that restoration, I think maybe we should semi-lock the article to avoid vandalism by annonymous users. Hezery99 13:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree. The bastards have been vandalizing all night. J'onn J'onzz 13:04, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I put the page up for semi-protection. Should get protected soon. --Ashfire908 13:31, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I can´t belive that featured articles aren´t protected the moment they go to the main page--ometzit<col> 14:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

It's today's frontpage article, we can't protect it, and admins will not protect it either. It has to be left unprotected so that anyone who wants to make a constructive edit can. It just happens that frontpage articles tend to get vandalized the most on their day. Nothing we can do but keep reverting and wait til tomorrow. Nique talk 14:03, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I thought that (at least at one point) all featured articles were semi-protected during the day that they are put up precisely because of the potential for heavy vandalism? - Fearless Son 17:53, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

they discussed that earlier... they couldnt do it in time so they just undo everything that happenes...im watching this article as well as them so i guess it helps a little. but no one can get it protectedDark reaper6789 17:57, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

That's a shame, 'cause some people keeps changing the article in an inappropiate way and submitting stupid stuff--DrMauroFrenchman 04:47, 12 May 2007 (UTC).

See Wikipedia:Main Page featured article protection, there's no actual policy/guideline against protecting the main page FA, just vocal opposition to it from various people, and 2-3 years of tradition. --W.marsh 19:55, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Too much plot in the setting section?

It seems like there is too much plot (story) in the setting section. Especially the second half. 66.167.71.151 14:41, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Not really; it's describing the backstory. I would prefer a lot of it moved to an article (along with the crufty location list subarticle, not the two paragraphs in the article, those are fine) called Gaia (Final Fantasy VII) to follow in the footsteps of Spira (Final Fantasy X), but we'll get to that eventually. — Deckill er 14:46, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Spoiler Warning

I don't think I saw a spoiler warning before reading this article. This article does contain many details that viewers might not want to see if they have not played the game —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.118.21.98 (talk) 14:48, 20 March 2007 (UTC).

There have been numerous debates over this in the past, which led to certain WikiProjects, such as the Final Fantasy/Square Enix WikiProjects, not using them. — Deckill er 14:50, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Which projects have banned it besides the FF project, and are you sure the SE one banned it? Kariteh 16:00, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[3]. I don't really see the need to detract time away from editing to look for the other projects that omit them completely or go on a "case by case basis", except the Video Games WikiProject, which implemented a "case by case" guideline for flexibility. I said "do not use them" ("ban" implies a strict ruling), which ties into that "case by case basis". Also, a WikiProject does not necessarily have to be a formal group: it can be as simple as a FA push. This can be seen in articles like Shadow of the Colossus, The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, and so on, which do not use the tags and fall under the CVG guideline stressing "case by case basis". But the horse has already been beaten enough; if a group of editors working on an article do not wish to use the warnings (and vice versa), then that's the example of the case by case basis outlined in the CVG MoS. — Deckill er 16:22, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

One I know of is Wikiproject Opera ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 22:38, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Reception

I remember this game having a poor response when it came out. I remember it getting bad reviews and everybody talking shit about it when it first came out. It seems like it has more of a cult following, but the article suggests that it did extremely well. Can somebody explain this to me? Rzrscm 19:38, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

You remember incorrectly. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 19:41, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I definetly remember correctly. I was reluctant to buy it because of the criticism. Rzrscm 19:44, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

It's obvious that whatever magazine or blog in which you found this criticism was in the extreme minority. Final Fantasy VII does not have a "cult following"; it is an incredibly popular game, as it was upon its release, and its admirers have always outnumbered its detractors. "Cult following" is simply not an applicable term in this case. (Anonymous, March 20 2007, 6:18 PM)

Cult following in descriptive use of FFVII is tantamount to calling Army of Darkness a cult film. Evil Dead is (or perhaps was) a cult film. By the time Army of Darkness came out it had become much more mainstream. How the hell do you think Bruce Cambell is doing Old Spice commercials anyways!? Dj8thick 03:22, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Or, cutting more to the facts than opinions, the vast majority of the reviews at launch were positive, and it was a best-seller. That isn't to say you didn't read or hear of a negative review, but they were not in the majority at the time. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 03:28, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

And the vandalism starts...

This is sorta getting rediculous. Mendinso 20:45, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree. Unfortunately, I'm on wireless, so my vandal fighting is limited. I think first-offense blocks are good in this situation; the first block is the user's warning. — Deckill er 20:46, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

There seems to be a fascination with turning the words backwards..--Cao Wei 21:12, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Main page, whoo!

Congratulations, everyone, Final Fantasy VII has survived being featured on the main page. Axem Titanium 02:32, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank god! That was arguably the hardest main page defense in my year as an admin. — Deckill er 04:44, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not so sure... I don't think this article is referenced very well. You just need a few more — Jack · talk · 13:46, Wednesday, 21 March 2007

Starting a subtext analysis page

I really think we should do this. Final Fantasy VII has intense philosophical, psycholigical subtext. It's why I loved the game anyway.--AquaFox 20:27, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not allow original research and unsourced analysis. Please see the attribution policy and its subpages for more. The Final Fantasy Wikia might allow something like that, however. — Deckill er 20:42, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I like this or it at least should be mentioned inr eception or something because there has been a lot looked into. I know that in A Play Within A Play in Issue 84 of The Escapist e-magazine they take a look at some of the psycological aspects in how they developed the characters and why exactly FF VII was a success Ariolander 06:32, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Clone

So is Cloud a copy of Sephiroth or not. I was never to clear on that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.119.6.234 (talk)

Firstly, please sign your talk page entries, and add them to the bottom of the page instead of the top. Second, Wikipedia talk pages are not a discussion forum, they're for discussing changes to the article. Thirdly, he's not a clone of anyone, though he does believe for a time that Zack's story is, for the most part, his own. Nique talk 00:17, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Compilation

The article Final_Fantasy_VII_Snowboarding states that it is not part of the compilation but the list here still includes it. So what's the real deal? Berserkerz Crit 14:09, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

It says quite clearly that Compilation titles are listed in bold and FFVII Snowboarding is not bolded. Axem Titanium 14:54, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

You shouldn't be using the american Cover

Came out in japan first... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.145.213 (talk • contribs) 17:39, 8 April 2007

Wouldnt you only use the japanese cover on the japanese wikipedia? Evaunit666 00:25, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

No the consensus was First release region gets the cover, many japanese games come out in us first and get us cover here.

Plus all us final fantasy title covers are ugly. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.42.145.213 (talk • contribs).

What consensus? Where? Nique talk 11:40, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Besides, this is the English Wikipedia. — Deckill er 14:16, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Lack of Spoiler Warnings

Why in the hell are there not spoiler warnings? There's a "plot" section, but that doesn't necessarily mean there will be spoilers, just as the back of a book or a review or a preview gives away the plot but doesn't spoil anything. In fact, the "Setting" section has some very helpful info without spoiling anything, leading a reader to believe he/she can read on without a problem.

Furthermore, if "plot" is a sufficient spoiler warning, then why are spoiler warnings used at all in Wikipedia? Why don't they just have a "plot" section for anything with a story? Simple: because "plot" is not a sufficient spoiler warning.

Even further, there's a BLATANT PICTURE of Sephiroth killing Aeris, with a caption that says Sephiroth kills Aeris. WTF?! This is ****ing ridiculous. I decided to be safe and scroll on past everything else after reading the "setting" section, but I couldn't miss that picture, and now that significant part of the story is ruined for me.

I don't give a crap how old this game is, it will always be new to somebody. I'm 23 and it's new to me. I heard a lot about this game, but never played it and never knew anything about it other than 2 character names and the fact that it's an RPG. Now I know a very important part of story, one that may have been quite sad for me had it been a surprise, because someone was inconsiderate enough to put that picture there. I'm extremely disappointed. 216.89.144.18 18:18, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

It's the decision and consensus of WP:FF (it's in their Manual of Style) and WP:SE editors to not use Spoiler warnings where spoilers should be expected in an encyclopedia. Read the previous discussions and archives of even just this page for the major reasonings, and put up with it, because it doesn't show signs of changing any time soon. In short: We're not here to protect people from themselves. Nique talk 18:42, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

This topic is in far too many places. Please post new concerns in the existing thread. You'll find that many of your concerns have already been addressed there. --—ΔαίδαλοςΣ Σ 19:05, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Just to clarify, it's the consensus of WP:FF, not a consensus of WP:SE. Spoiler Warnings can and should be (and are) used in non-FF related articles. Kariteh 20:50, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

And how exactly would a spoiler warning would have made you miss that image as you scrolled down? You would've still scrolled down and seen the image. — Deckill er 21:28, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Do we really have to answer this for you? Seriously, even IF everyone else has valid points on this topic, THIS PARTICULAR STATEMENT says that you're really not thinking this through. They are saying that the word "Plot" dignifies "Spoiler", and others call for spoiler tags. Do you think that there being ANY spoiler warnings on the page would make someone NOT want to scroll down seeing as how many may NOT have even played the games? Really, this is one of those quotes that I think you might have wished you didn't say. Darkpower 11:12, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

I would read and post in the current spoilers thread, but in it people have given away more of the story. That's real smart. "It's the decision and consensus of WP:FF (it's in their Manual of Style) and WP:SE editors to not use Spoiler warnings where spoilers should be expected in an encyclopedia." I don't care who's decision it is/was. I'm saying it was a BAD decision, or at least an INCONSIDERATE decision. And I expect spoilers to be in Wikipedia, regardless of the fact that it's an encyclopedia, because you use them everywhere else where appropriate. "We're not here to protect people from themselves." Fantastic! Then why are spoiler warnings used at all?!! Whatever you're here for, can you at least be consistent? "And how exactly would a spoiler warning would have made you miss that image as you scrolled down? You would've still scrolled down and seen the image." Did I say spoiler warnings would make me miss the image, or was I talking about both things separately? The point: please put spoiler warnings up AND remove the image.24.107.92.149 00:45, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

"We're not here to protect people from themselves." Fantastic! Then why are spoiler warnings used at all?!! Well yes, that's exactly how some of us feel. Noone owns a page, so the only way things like this happen is through consensus -- and the FF project's consensus is to not use the warnings. Same with the opera wikipreject, and there is a lot of fiction, especially "classics" that don't have the warnings. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 01:34, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

We are consistent- there are no spoiler tags in any FF page. Also, yeah, most of us don't think that there should be spoilers anywhere in WP, but hey. Also, and this is something I wonder everytime this discussion comes up, why the hell would you read the WP article on a game that you haven't played but are going to? it's going to ruin things. Finally, you obviously have never read the back cover of a book in your life if you think it doesn't spoil things. Any back cover is going to ruin the first quarter of the book at least, and I've read some that mentioned plot points that don't happen till well past halfway. Any WP article is going to go all the way to the end, spoiler tag or no, leaving out information is not what an encyclopedia is about. --PresN 03:20, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

The picture has also been debated. The consensus of the project is to keep the picture, because spoiler or no, it is an iconic image of the game as it is one of the most well-known scenes. And Wikipedia is not censored, so we will not remove information just because someone doesn't like it. --—ΔαίδαλοςΣ Σ 19:45, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I think you should use a different picture because something else happens in that scene, anyway (the materia falling from her hair, which is very important in its own right).

Personally, I think the picture in question is being left in (not saying I really care anymore, this whole spoiler shit is retarded, anyway) to prove a point to fanboys or something like that. Plus, PLEASE read my answer to this up above, calling for an article split of all of the story parts of these, since this spoiler thing is stupid and needs to be resolved once and for all.Darkpower 11:12, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Wutai

Someone's forgotten to mention the fourth landmass...the western continent! Unless it's not relevant to the section, I dunno... --195.195.249.9 13:56, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Wutai isn't a fourth landmass, it is an archipelago that is part of the western continent. For that matter, Wutai is the name of the village, not the area. Wutai is an entirely optional location that only has any significance if you get an optional character, thus it is trivial in regards to game as a whole. --—ΔαίδαλοςΣ Σ 15:52, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

It's also where you have to go to get a summon Materia (Leviathan) in which said optional character is required in order to get the Materia. So it has some respects to gameplay. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Darkpower (talk • contribs) 13:49, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Absolutely, it does. But those are still all optional. It should have no more credence in this article than any other optional sidequest. Does Missing Number and the side quest with the chests in the ShinRa Mansion get a mention in the article? You get a Summon Materia for that one too, right?. Yet overall it is still completely trivial. The same goes for Wutai. In fact, the only place that Wutai really should be mentioned at all is to say that Yuffie comes from there. Not even the ShinRa-Wutai war from 15 years before the game is notable enough to be mentioned in any way other than backstories for Aerith and Yuffie. --—ΔαίδαλοςΣ 17:15, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Youtube Links

Is posting Youtube videos on Wikipedia allowed? Especially videos that show the gameplay of a certain player's video game? — Bluerです。^なにか? 11:39, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

There might be times when a YouTube video could technically be 'allowed'...I'm not positive. FFMaster7's links don't belong here though since they are simply not notable. --Onorem Dil 11:45, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Youtube videos are allowed when they are legal. Copyrighted stuff are definitely not allowed. Kariteh 14:13, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Abbreviations

I removed the abbreviations as per Wikipedia:WikiProject Final Fantasy/Manual of style#General Rules because these aren't allowed generally (i.e. RPG, PS1, WIN). Sjones23 19:49, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Combat subsection

References a "flaregamer.com" article as its primary source material, and yet the source article has no form of attribution. It talks about Nomura in third-person, never quoting him or providing any source of its own. For all I can see it is purely speculative. One problem in particular is that the article claims that Limit Breaks were a replacement for Desperation Attacks, however the Limit Breaks have much more in common with the unique special abilities that characters had in FF4 and FF6. In fact, some of the Limit moves are borrowed from the earlier games' specials, such as the Dragoon Jump. If a reliable source cannot be found for these statements, I think the entire portion of the Combat subsection where Nomura is discussed should be removed. Ham Pastrami 16:03, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

The flaregamer article cites its sources and has an editor staff; it is reliable enough for the subject at hand. They are a modified form of the Desperation attacks; similar concepts. The names of attacks have nothing to do with the actual concept. — Deckill er 16:12, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Wait Just One Second

In Final Fantasy 7, Cloud THROWS Sephiroth into the Mako Pit, he does not merely FALL in. While impaled, Cloud pulls the sword down, lifting Sephiroth up and catapults him over the edge! This is ENTIRELY different than in the Anime where the whole thing is skewed. Cloud undeniabley defeats Sephiroth as a footsoldier in the actual game! This is VERY important. Michaelkulov 18:42, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

While that's all well and good, the plot section of this page provides a summary of the game. Great detail about anything might make it too long. Try to add that to the Last Order page if it's important enough. Axem Titanium 20:16, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Isn't it too long already.Darkpower 11:50, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

how is a level 1 cloud throwing a level 50 sephiroth into the mako anything but important?Michaelkulov 21:41, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

i added in the fact that cloud throws him in. it should stand and the article retains its summary status. Michaelkulov 21:50, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Just as a side-note, don't forget that all these are fictions and that Wikipedia follows an out of universe perspective. There is no "truth" regarding what happens in the Mako reactor. This article must report what is shown in FFVII; the Last Order article must report what is shown in Last Order, and the Sephiroth and Cloud articles must report both versions of the events in an objective way. Kariteh 22:01, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Also as another side note, their levels are irrelevant. Game mechanics serve to aide the narrative story-telling by providing a believable interactability, what happens in narrative story-telling is not neccessarily dependent upon game mechanics. --—ΔαίδαλοςΣ 22:54, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

how are their levels irrelevant. id say level 1 compared to level 50 is relevant and in context. it shows just how unbelievable it is that cloud was able to throw Sephiroth in, who is supposed to be unbeatable. and as for the first note on my comment, all I did was state what happened in the game, which is what the article is about. I will check out that WP:Fiction page.

It's irrelevant because Narrative is not constrained by Gameplay Mechanics. Aerith's death, for example, why can you not use a Life spell or a Phoenix Down to bring her back to life? Because she died in the Narrative storytelling, and it does not neccessarily follow game mechanics which otherwise would allow us to ressurect her. Their levels are irrelevant for the same reason. What is relevant is that Sephiroth was SOLDIER 1st Class (and the best at that) and Cloud was merely a member of ShinRa GUARD. This keeps the information with as little gameguide as possible. --—ΔαίδαλοςΣ 18:41, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes I see what you are saying now. Thanks for the correction :)Michaelkulov 23:05, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

To all those who wished to add a spoiler tag

Please go see WP:SPOILER and read what does not need a spoiler tag, fictional articles with the plot or story section is KNOWN to contain spoilers and does not need a spoiler tag. So stop adding those in for the sake of following the guidelines. MythSearcher^talk 00:52, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Merger of Chocobo Stallion into FFVII article

The article is a one sentence mention, since the whole game is just the putting of the chocobo racing element from this game onto its own disk. Judgesurreal777 05:40, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Agree. I don't even know such article exist! — Bluerです。 06:31, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Just a question. Do you really know if the game is a direct port of the FFVII Chocobo racing minigame, or do you say this only because that's what's written in the article? Kariteh 20:40, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

http://www.square-haven.com/games/ps/cs/#links Here is a link and on further inspection, I am not so sure....could we get some other people to help look into this? Judgesurreal777 00:12, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Talked about it on FF wikiproject, evidence points to a unique game. Removing merger. Judgesurreal777 03:42, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Massacre? Rediculous!

I doubt Final Fantasy ACTUALLY cause the 1999 massacre. Who else agrees? And, before this is erased, be sure to actually answer this, someone! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.111.228.106 (talk)

I agree. It is ridiculous. What's your point? The article does not say that the game caused the massacre. The article says that families making that claim filed a lawsuit, which is verified by the reference provided. --Onorem Dil 01:31, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

error in paragraph 3?

It says in the mid 2000s. Would that not be around 2500? I know what you mean but you may want to rewrite it.

Spoiler warning in "Other" section

I don't feel like warring over it, so I'll ask here. Has WP:FF decided to use them? If not, do the recent changes at WP:SPOILER make a difference here now? --Onorem Dil 14:30, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

WP:SPOILER clearly states that spoiler warnings may be used when "the editors proposing them have compelling arguments for their insertion." It does not say "Any spoilers outside of a (plot/synopsis/characters) section need a spoiler warning," and I don't see that an event, however heartbreakingly spoilerish to some people, in a game that's been incredibly popular for 10 years is reason enough for a spoiler warning. If anyone has a better reasoning than has been come up with previously, maybe it should be considered, but I don't recall there being a spoiler warning in the section before: why now? Nique talk 14:53, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I'd say that if the section only mentioned Aerith's death, it does not need a spoiler warning, however, I highly doubt that mentioning what is happening afterwards, like travelling in the life stream part is not a spoiler. I hate spoiler warnings, but I think that one follows the WP:spoiler guidelines pretty well. It is well known that she died, that is a given, but she died but still took part in the story and did something? That is less well known, and talks too much. Anyway, I am not a strong defender of using a spoiler tag, and have no wish to be on an edit war or arguement regarding this, if anyone strongly opposes it, I do not care about it being there or not, just trying to follow the guidelines and stating my point of view here. MythSearcher^talk 15:00, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

And again, I have to ask why now? Why now, when there was no talk of or attempt to put a spoiler warning there at any point I can find in the history a few pages back. This article has had no spoiler warnings, and it has not suffered because of this. Yes, there have been occasional anons or new accounts ranting on about spoilers and how knowing about Aeris's death ruins the game (which it doesn't, it's on the first disc, of all places), but that hasn't prompted the lasting addition of a spoiler warning war before. So, why now? WP:SPOILER doesn't require it, and even says it shouldn't be there unless there's a compelling case for it, so I don't see what this fuss is all about. Nique talk 15:32, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I have the same opinion as MythSearcher, except I think that this precisely means a Spoiler warning is needed. The "Why not" argument is totally irrelevant; there is no dead line. One could find examples of articles in which something that had to be done has still not been done for ages. The Final Fantasy (series) article has been sucking since ages for instance. One could also find articles in which a typo, a mistake, or an error has not been fixed until months for instance, and that doesn't mean that the typo, the mistake, or the error was not important or wasn't one at all. This "Other" section needs a Spoiler warning regardless of how much time it had survived without one, and your only counter-argument to this seems to be an irrelevant "I don't like it". Kariteh 16:21, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

There is just 2 things I have to point out here: Nique1287, as much as you said you did not violate the 3RR rule on my talk page, you just did when you reverted Kariteh's edit. Second, it seems to be very funny that the discussion stoped right after the edit war, which Nique got what he wants(no spoiler tag). I don't know if this is why he did not reply to the discussion, or simply because he went offline, but this is not making him look good nor improving things. MythSearcher^talk 17:19, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

P.S. Aerith's death is not why the spoiler warning is there, it is more of the lifestream thing that is not revealed until the very last disc. At least that is why I reverted the edit. MythSearcher^talk 17:19, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

No, I did not. More than three reverts. Also, I'm not taking offence, but I'm not a he, just for reference. As for the revert war stopping, I just restored it to where it was before this nonsense because the discussion should come first to justify the tags per WP:SPOILER. You two and anyone else are free to revert it back to with the tags, and I wouldn't do anything not only because of WP:3RR, but because the discussion should come before action at this point. As for going offline or making myself look bad, I have a life, and thus I have things to do other than sit on Wiki all day. I check back when I have time and when I feel like it. Is that a crime?

There may not be a deadline, but I still don't see why it needs a spoiler tag. The game's ages old, the number of people for whom it would ACTUALLY be spoiled is so minimal by this time, even considering newer/younger gamers, that I don't see the justification. 10 years is a long time to be caring about spoilers on a videogame this popular. And "the lifestream thing"? I don't think I understand what you mean. I never said this was about Aeris's death, I said that there were anons and new users who raved about how that was spoiled for them even though it's on the first disc. However, I don't see how "It follows Aeris' journey in the Lifestream following her death at the hands of Sephiroth, taking place concurrently with the second half of Final Fantasy VII" is a spoiler for anything but Aeris's death and/or the novella itself. Nique talk 17:34, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

No, I only said that you made yourself look bad, which is not a good thing to do. I would have at least write down something here before leaving, after the article was modified to suit my interest. Also, I said that her death is not the spoiler, every other person know about this, but is the story about she died and did more afterwards a well known plot? I doubt it is. Like I've said, I personally hated spoiler tags, and I fighted as much as I can to avoid it being used when the anons keep adding them in, but I think that certifies as a spoiler since usually people die in stories, and that's it, they seldom have anything to do with the story again(unless it is the type of story where people keep coming back to life and it became the norm in the story) So saying she did something after she died sounds pretty like what people claim spoilers are to me. It suggests something happened out of the norm. Maybe the paragraph itself can be modified to avoid the spoiler warning, like "It follows Aeris' journey in the Lifestream, taking place concurrently with the second half of Final Fantasy VII" would be perfectly fine. It shows nothing about the story, and does not specify it happened after her death,(at least to people who do not know the story.) but will be perfectly meaningful to people who played the game. And I don't see a violation in the guidelines in the WP:spoiler with this edit, and the sentence itself loses no information. MythSearcher^talk 17:54, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

(Random unindent) I did write something down before leaving. When I left, there were no other replies. Am I supposed to give a detailed, minute-by-minute account of where I am when I'm part of a discussion? As for the spoiler, I don't see how "...following her death at the hands of Sephiroth" is any more spoilerriffic, really, than just saying "her journey in the Lifestream". The fact that she dies doesn't change, it's still obvious because, except for Cloud and Tifa, only dead people have gone to the Lifestream, and the death is what people seem to complain about most spoiler-wise, as far as I've seen, because she's so beloved a character in the beginning. However, the "at the hands of Sephiroth" is kind of repetitive considering the HUGE WALL OF TEXT that is the plot section, so it should probably go, but even so, saying "her journey in the Lifestream following her death" is no worse than "her journey in the Lifestream" for spoilers, unless you're going to bring out the "but if people don't know what the Lifestream is, they don't have to know she dies!" argument, in which case I have to, again, bring up the age of the game: if you don't know she dies yet, play the game first, it's cheap enough by now that it won't break the bank, and you can get emulators to play it on almost any computer, even, without a Playstation, with just a Google search. Wikipedia isn't here to coddle new users; that's why WP:SPOILER was written the way it is. Nique talk 23:02, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

My point is: "if people don't know what the Lifestream is", they don't know "only dead people have gone to the Lifestream" and "can do something there". I have played the game, so I know, but obvious enough that people who did not play the game, can probably only get their hands on the fact that "Aerith died in the middle of the game" but not "What a lifestream is" The spoiler is telling what a lifestream is to non-players, not she died. MythSearcher^talk 05:26, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I find putting a spoiler warning on for what the Lifestream is to be somewhat ridiculous. Again, the number of non-players who will care afterward about being spoiled at this point is minimal. It's not as though FFVII is some underground yet incredible game, it's been in the public eye for a decade. It's time to give the spoiler warnings a rest on it. Nique talk 13:48, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Like I said, I don't think this is a strong case, but I see nothing wrong with modifying the sentence to avoid and minimize the anon spoiler haters poping up and messing around. Since people who played the game will know what a lifestream is, mentioning it happened after she died is just redundent, especially the sentence said it is concurrent with the second half of the story in the game. MythSearcher^talk 14:36, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

How about you fellows work on getting articles to GA/FA status instead? It's much more productive, and may actualy take less time. :-) — Deckill er 15:43, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

And watch out for 3RR... ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 15:44, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

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.[4]. 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)

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? MythSearcher^talk 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).

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:

File:Auction ff7demo 01.jpg

File: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)

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. — Deckill er 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. — Deckill er 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)

Square/soft

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

It is Squaresoft on its logo. MythSearcher^talk 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. --Onorem Dil 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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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. MythSearcher^talk 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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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? — Bl ue 。 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. — Bl ue 。 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. — Bl ue 。 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. — Bl ue 。 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. — Bl ue 。 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. — Bl ue 。 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. — Bl ue 。 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)

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)

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)

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. — Bl ue 。 12:54, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Gaia reference

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

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)

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)

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)

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. — Bl ue 。 03:29, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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. MythSearcher^talk 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. MythSearcher^talk 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. MythSearcher^talk 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. — Bl ue 。 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))

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:Article issues. 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)

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. umrguy 42 03:26, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

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)

I agree with the creator of this thread. Sections of text that you know contain spoilers are easy to avoid, but an image is something that will always draw attention to it. It's irrelevant how old or well known the game is. Anyone who has any respect for the game should agree that any reasonable precaution that can be made, should be made to avoid spoiling the plot for the surprisingly large population of casual gamers who have heard about, but never actually played the game. True, Wikipedia is not a review site, but it also happens to be the most popular site for general information, and it is very likely, as I can relate, that someone with an interest in starting the game may peruse the Wikipedia article for general information, while trying to actively avoid spoiler sections. Having arguably the most crucial spoiler sticking out so blatantly is simply unacceptable. St elmo88 (talk) 00:09, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

No matter how much I look at the picture, I don't think people who never played the game before can get any serious spoiler from it. A character stabbed another character, so what? To a new player, all they can conclude from the picture is that there is a scene like this, it reveals nothing important, not even her death, one cannot judge a character's death from a picture like this, when the characters are polygons and stabbing at a right place could be non lethal. If a person started reading the words under the picture in the story section, they intentionally take the spoiler themselves. MythSearcher^talk 06:10, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I would argue that it really isn't a spoiler anymore. It's like the twist in Empire Strikes Back. If you're looking up Final Fantasy VII, there is probably a 80% chance that you know Aeris/Aerith kicks the bucket. --Plasma Twa 2 08:29, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

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)

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)

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)

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)

Development section update

Kitase did a new interview about FFVII in the latest issue of Level Magazine, according to [5]. 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)

I filled in some citations in this section based on the links to NeoGAF. They are actually from two separate interviews conducted nearly two years apart. The first GAF post (5-06-2006 FFVII development background) says that the info is from the "premier" issue of Level, which would be Issue 1 from April 2006. The interview from the second post (5-27-2008 New Yoshinori Kitase interview) says it comes from the "latest issue", which at the time would be Issue 25, May 2008. Without a hard copy of each, I can't fill in the page numbers, but these are the original sources at least. Nall (talk) 22:41, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Copy Editing

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

Didn't look bad. Some confusing syntax I tried to clean up. Pretty easy read, though. There are no major problems.Fdssdf (talk) 18:00, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the copy edit. It's greatly appreciated. The Prince (talk) 18:04, 11 June 2008 (UTC)